5 ms·

Maurizio Cattelan famous to for his satirical pieces like a banana taped to a wall and a solid gold toilet, was not born to a rich family. He also had no formal

Maurizio Cattelan famous to for his satirical pieces like a banana taped to a wall and a solid gold toilet, was not born to a rich family. He also had no formal art training. Banksy did not rely on meeting people, quite the opposite. There's a documentary called the price of everything of a man who spent a decade with his wife in his secluded art studio producing a new art technique and came back in 2015-2016 to 'turn in his work' and made bank. There's more to art than nepotism.

SirLuxuryYacht 6y ago
There's a where the rubber meets the road aspect to each of these artists. What happened to Maurizio Cattelan between being born and duct taping that banana? Who did the man and wife turn their art into? It seems that these things did not just happen one day and then they became famous. Clearly they all knew someone who lit the marketing fuse. Could've been a rich cousin or could have been someone on the street with a social media following.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Hoasi 6y ago
Those are perfect counterexamples. Although both these artists knew quite a bit about marketing and advertising, which is paramount in art, as noted by Warhol. > There's more to art than nepotism. Fortunately yes.
Broken_Hippo 6y ago
Most things like this have outliers. It doesn't change the fact that being a successful artist mostly relies on having the right social network and sheer luck. The examples you gave had luck that got them to the right social circles - it'd have been easier for either one if they were born into the right sorts of families. The social circle thing is so prevalent that most artist I've met that sell regularly spend about as much or more time networking as they do making art. Most folks are just stuck having luck enough to sell from time to time, especially if they are outliers and not doing things that match many living rooms.

SirLuxuryYacht 6y ago

There's a where the rubber meets the road aspect to each of these artists. What happened to Maurizio Cattelan between being born and duct taping that banana? Who did the man and wife turn their art into? It seems that these things did not just happen one day and then they became famous. Clearly they all knew someone who lit the marketing fuse. Could've been a rich cousin or could have been someone on the street with a social media following.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Hoasi 6y ago

Those are perfect counterexamples. Although both these artists knew quite a bit about marketing and advertising, which is paramount in art, as noted by Warhol. > There's more to art than nepotism. Fortunately yes.

Broken_Hippo 6y ago

Most things like this have outliers. It doesn't change the fact that being a successful artist mostly relies on having the right social network and sheer luck. The examples you gave had luck that got them to the right social circles - it'd have been easier for either one if they were born into the right sorts of families. The social circle thing is so prevalent that most artist I've met that sell regularly spend about as much or more time networking as they do making art. Most folks are just stuck having luck enough to sell from time to time, especially if they are outliers and not doing things that match many living rooms.