Damn you, 20x200!
Damn! I have no money. And I normally dislike "20x200" and "Hey Hot Shot! " Or as I used to call it, "Hey, F$$k You, Hot Shot!" (that is until Ms. Bekman started to give out $500 to each of the competition winners).
No. 13. 3/11/2006 (plane lifted by men). ©William Lamson
So, what is my point? Well. How do you not buy the above print by W. Lamson for only $20! I couldn't help it. This guy is one of my favorite artists working today.
I don't know Jen. And I doubt she even knows who I am. But I have just always gotten a weird vibe from her whole thing: HHS, her store-front gallery, 20x200. It just seems like she keeps trying to make herself or her next endeavor the center of attention and not the artist. Someone once said it perfect, "who has become a star from being apart of Jen Bekman's thing? Jen Bekman, and only Jen Bekman." I mean, she puts a diary entry about herself on the bi-weekly 20x200 newsletter. And both the 20x200 and HHS sites both advertise "A Jen Bekman Project."
But I can't talk shit anymore. I almost entered the HHS competition this time around for the prize money. And many of my close friends support her, have sold work through 20x200, have had shows with her, and are friends with her. So, I take it all back. I now "heart" Jen Bekman. Ok, maybe not. But I did just send her $20 that I don't have. Thanks Credit Cards!
But seriously, how much does she make off of 20x200? With a 50% commission (did I hear that right? Does she take a full 50% for online sales?) I am guessing she makes anywhere from $125,000 to $200,000 annually? And that is completely separate income from her self-titled gallery and HHS!
An estimated 200 prints a week at $20, multiplied by 52 weeks, equals $208,000. Of course she has to pay her printer, and packaging, blogger, assistants, etc. But still. It's f$$king amazing!
So you're still asking what is my point? I am not sure. I guess I have to say now that there is prize money involved in HHS and that 50% (or more?) of the 20x200 sales do directly support the art, it's a good thing. And that is cool by me. Me, who has no say in the matter at all. Just another shitty blogger trying to say something worthwhile, and still promote theirs and others work.
I am still very, very much in debt from my recent project. Jen? Want to sell a print?
No. 13. 3/11/2006 (plane lifted by men). ©William Lamson
So, what is my point? Well. How do you not buy the above print by W. Lamson for only $20! I couldn't help it. This guy is one of my favorite artists working today.
I don't know Jen. And I doubt she even knows who I am. But I have just always gotten a weird vibe from her whole thing: HHS, her store-front gallery, 20x200. It just seems like she keeps trying to make herself or her next endeavor the center of attention and not the artist. Someone once said it perfect, "who has become a star from being apart of Jen Bekman's thing? Jen Bekman, and only Jen Bekman." I mean, she puts a diary entry about herself on the bi-weekly 20x200 newsletter. And both the 20x200 and HHS sites both advertise "A Jen Bekman Project."
But I can't talk shit anymore. I almost entered the HHS competition this time around for the prize money. And many of my close friends support her, have sold work through 20x200, have had shows with her, and are friends with her. So, I take it all back. I now "heart" Jen Bekman. Ok, maybe not. But I did just send her $20 that I don't have. Thanks Credit Cards!
But seriously, how much does she make off of 20x200? With a 50% commission (did I hear that right? Does she take a full 50% for online sales?) I am guessing she makes anywhere from $125,000 to $200,000 annually? And that is completely separate income from her self-titled gallery and HHS!
An estimated 200 prints a week at $20, multiplied by 52 weeks, equals $208,000. Of course she has to pay her printer, and packaging, blogger, assistants, etc. But still. It's f$$king amazing!
So you're still asking what is my point? I am not sure. I guess I have to say now that there is prize money involved in HHS and that 50% (or more?) of the 20x200 sales do directly support the art, it's a good thing. And that is cool by me. Me, who has no say in the matter at all. Just another shitty blogger trying to say something worthwhile, and still promote theirs and others work.
I am still very, very much in debt from my recent project. Jen? Want to sell a print?
posted by Timothy Briner at
9:13 AM
7 Comments:
http://davidbram.blogspot.com/2008/03/jenk-bekmans-20x200.html
I've been watching 20x200 for a long time and I've bought a few prints and I have two friends who have sold print through it. My thoughts:
1. Jen does promote herself and her gallery. THis used to rub me the wrong way too, but I've come to feel this is good for her artists. Once people trust her taste they will be more likely buy because as we all know getting people to spend money on art is difficult.
2. For many artists especially emerging artists it's possible to get more exposure in a day and to sell to more people than they ever would on their own.
3. My friends got bigger paychecks from 20x200 for single images than they have in years on their own for any single image.
4. As you say when people try to calculate what Jen is making they aren't calculating in the cost of rent, employees, keeping the site up and running, publicity, packaging, and so on. All the costs of running a real business. It's not as if Jen is just some lady somewhere who makes the thing work by herself.
5. 20x200 is the only place I know of where you can buy quality prints from interesting artists for anything close to an affordable price. TIny Showcase is similar, but their stuff is more illustration.
I bought the print by Lamson myself. Both of them
I'm not sure what the point of the post is. You're annoyed that Jen Bekman is a self promoter who sells lots of art, but you sort of want to be part of it? I sometimes call myself an artist who supports art, but the truth is most of the art I've bought this year was from 20x200. Those newsletters motivate me to buy prints and the prints give me far greater pleasure than the money I spend. So it's a certainly a good deal for me.
Be careful what you say and where you say it. You are much too young and your career is much to young and fragile to be burning bridges just yet.
When you are rich and famous, go crazy.
But for now, zip it up.
know that feeling...
I do understand the point of this post, and sympathize with the ambivalence about its subject... and I certainly don't think expressing an honest opinion ( which has crossed the mind of many who simply haven't stated it publicly) should be considered "burning bridges", that's just silly.
I'm coming to this late, but I did want to say a few things.
First off, of course I know who you are! I know your work, and your blog and all that good stuff. Also, I am friends with many of the photographers you're friends with, including the charming and talented Mr. Haakon Thompson who put me up in Mpls shortly before or after you visited him there. (I can't remember the chronology.)
Secondly, I respect both your ambivalence about the various projects I've done and the fact that you've got opinions and aren't shy about expressing them. I'm not one who's known for keeping her mouth shut, so I'm naturally inclined to admire others who are similarly outspoken. No bridges have been burned so far as I can tell. (Not by you, at least!)
I don't expect everyone to like me, nor do I want them to. I am not trying to win any personality contests, I'm trying to figure out how to make art work for everyone. Seriously, that is what keeps me up at night.
People can, and will and do speculate and gossip about my narcissism, greediness or lack of taste. I've seen it all and I'm sure to see more of it and I try not to let it bug me too much. Mostly I feel like I take surprisingly little heat for someone who has such a big mouth. I *do* sweat when people I respect question what I do, but more importantly, I try to listen and learn.
The truth is that I'm really genuinely committed to emerging artists and collectors. I opened my gallery having no background, connections or reputation in the arts, with a program that focused on exhibiting emerging artists. With two unknown entities, it seemed to make more sense to promote the organization as a whole rather than the many individuals that were exhibiting at the gallery. It seemed the most efficient use of my energy, and I believe its served the business and the artists associated with the business well.
20x200 has been an amazingly fulfilling and gratifying experience. As we come up on a year since the launch, I'm beginning to get a sense of the net effect of its existence. I've written a lot of big checks to artists, and that feels good. I've put a lot of real, good art on the walls of people who thought they'd never own art in their lives, and I've seen their attitudes about art go from uninterested and indifferent to engaged and critical.
My business is finally somewhat stable after many long years of sitting around worrying about the lights getting turned off or the landlord changing the locks. I'm not speaking euphemistically here, I mean it quite literally. Being subject to criticism about being greedy and/or taking advantage of artists was particularly stinging when that was my day-to-day reality.
Artist don't have to starve, collectors don't have to be rich and art doesn't have to be expensive to be good. Those are the guiding principles of my projects and programs, and they're the foundation on which the core values of my organization rest.
As for me, I'm entirely human and I have made mistakes, and I am sure to make more as I move forward. My goal is to have the humility and grace to learn from them.
Post a Comment
<< Home