Co-Authoring Advanced Art

The joint production of paintings by more than one artist was not uncommon in the past: a number of Old Masters had assistants do much of the work on their paintings, executing images that had been planned by the master. Yet prior to the twentieth century very few paintings were actually signed by more than one artist. Early in the twentieth century, many important conceptual artists occasionally co-authored paintings or drawings, but consistent co-authorship of paintings, sculptures, and photographs is a practice that is novel to the late twentieth century. These recent instances have generally involved pairs of conceptual artists. The English team, Gilbert and George, is the most important pair that has consistently produced co-authored works; they have executed all of their work jointly since 1969, when they made Singing Sculpture, their first and most famous piece. A number of pairs of young conceptual artists had worked closely together earlier in the century, but they did not formally co-author their work, perhaps because of the art world's commitment to the ideal of the autonomous artist. Since the critical and economic success of Gilbert and George has demonstrated that this resistance can be overcome, co-authorship has become more common among younger conceptual artists, and this trend is likely to continue in future.

The New York School vs. the School of Paris: Who Really Made the Most Important Art After World War II?

American historians of modern art routinely assume that after World War II New York replaced Paris as the center of the western art world. An analysis of the illustrations in French textbooks shows that French art scholars disagree: they rate Jean Dubuffet as the most important painter of the era, ahead of Jackson Pollock, and they consider Yves Klein's anthropometries of 1960 as the greatest contribution of a single year, in front of Andy Warhol's innovations in Pop Art. Yet the French texts also show that the French artists' practices and conceptions of art paralleled those of the Americans. Thus while French and American scholars disagree over the relative importance of their nations' artists, there is no disagreement that the most important art of the 1950s was produced by experimental seekers, and that of the 60s by conceptual finders.

Painting by Proxy: The Conceptual Artist as Manufacturer

In 1958, the French philosopher Etienne Gilson observed that "painters are related to manual laborers by a deep-rooted affinity that nothing can eliminate," because painting was the one art in which the person who conceives the work is also necessarily the person who executes it. Conceptual innovators promptly proved Gilson wrong, however, by eliminating the touch of the artist from their paintings: in 1960 the French artist Yves Klein began using "living brushes" - nude models covered with paint - to execute his paintings, and in 1963 Andy Warhol began having his assistant Gerard Malanga silkscreen his canvases. Today many leading artists do not touch their own paintings, and some never see them. This paper traces the innovations that allowed a complete separation between the conception and execution of paintings. The foundation of this separation was laid long before the 20th century, by conceptual Old Masters including Raphael and Rubens, who employed teams of assistants to produce their paintings, but artists began exploring its logical limits during the conceptual revolution of the 1960s and beyond. Thus by the end of the twentieth century Jeff Koons explained that he did not participate in the work of painting his canvases because he believed it would interfere with his growth as an artist, and Damien Hirst defended his practice of having his paintings made by assistants on the grounds that their paintings were better than his. Eliminating the touch of the artist from painting is yet another way in which conceptual innovators transformed art in the twentieth century.

Do the Young British Artists Rule (or: Has London Stolen the Idea of Postmodern Art from New York?): Evidence from the Auction Market

In recent years, some English critics have claimed that Damien Hirst and his fellow young British artists have made London the new center of the advanced art world. As Hirst reaches the age of 40, this paper uses auction results to measure the importance of the YBAs compared to their American peers. Auction prices show that the YBAs do rule over their American rivals: both Hirst and the English painter Chris Ofili have had individual works sell for more than $1 million, a level no American artist under 40 has achieved. Whether London can continue its success will depend in part on whether it can match New York's ability to attract important artists born in other countries.

The Methods and Careers of Leading American Painters in the late Nineteenth Century

Although American painters of the late nineteenth century were much less influential than their European counterparts, the methods and careers of the leading American artists of the period reflect the same division between visual and conceptual approaches that characterized French art. The conceptual painters Thomas Eakins and John Singer Sargent matured early, and made individual landmark paintings, whereas the experimentalists Mary Cassatt, Winslow Homer, Albert Pinkham Ryder, and James McNeill Whistler developed more slowly, and made their contributions gradually in larger bodies of work. These American artists were less innovative than their French contemporaries, but they created approaches to art no less considered than those of their more famous counterparts.

On the Age at Leaving Home in the Early Nineteenth Century: Evidence from the Lives of New England Manufacturers

Much recent research has focussed on some decisions that affected family composition in the past, including the determination of the age of marriage and the timing of fertility. This paper considers another such decision that has been relatively neglected, the determination of the age at which children left the parental home. Observations drawn from a collection of biographies of successful New England manufacturers, most of whom departed from their parents' homes in the first half of the nineteenth century, indicated that their age of departure was concentrated in the late teen ages and early twenties, with a median of 18 years. Multivariate analysis suggested that the age at which these men had left home varied directly with family income or wealth and inversely with the opportunity cost of their retention at home. Sons whose fathers had died tended to leave home earlier than otherwise, as did those whose first job away from home was in the employ of a relative, while those whose families invested more in their formal education appear to have stayed home longer.

Wisdom and Creativity in Old Age: Lessons from the Impressionists

Psychologists have not considered wisdom and creativity to be closely associated. This reflects their failure to recognize that creativity is not exclusively the result of bold discoveries by young conceptual innovators. Important advances can equally be made by older, experimental innovators. Yet we have had no examination of why some experimental artists have remained creative much later in their lives than others. Considering the major artists who worked together during the first decade of Impressionism, this paper compares the attitudes and practices of two important experimental innovators who made significant contributions after the age of 50 with two of their colleagues whose creativity failed to persist past 50. Unlike Pissarro and Renoir, who reacted to adversity in mid-career by attempting to emulate the methods of conceptual artists, Cézanne and Monet adopted elements of other artists' approaches while maintaining their own experimental methods and goals. For both Cézanne and Monet, recognizing how they themselves learned was a key to turning experience into wisdom. Their greatness in old age appears to have been a product of their understanding that although the improvement in their art might be painstaking and slow, over long periods its cumulative effect could be very great.

Anticipating Artistic Success (or, How to Beat the Art Market): Lessons from History

The recent history of modern art provides clues as to how important artists can be identified before their work becomes generally known. Advanced art has been dominated by conceptual innovators since the late 1950s, and the importance of formal art education in the training of leading artists has also increased during this period. A few schools have been particularly prominent. Auction market records reveal that during the past five decades the Yale School of Art has produced a series of graduates who have achieved great success commercially as well as critically. Recognizing Yale's role can allow collectors to identify important artists before they become widely recognized, and therefore before their early innovative work rises in value.

Was Jackson Pollock the Greatest Modern American Painter? A Quantitative Investigation

A survey of the illustrations in textbooks of modern art demonstrates that scholars do consider Jackson Pollock the most important modern American painter, but not by a wide margin over Jasper Johns and Andy Warhol, the leading artists of the following generation. The distribution of the illustrations furthermore reveals a sharp contrast in the careers of the major artists of these two generations: the Abstract Expressionists produced their most important contributions late in their careers, whereas their successors innovated early in theirs. This difference resulted from the differing approaches of the artists, for the Abstract Expressionists were experimental innovators, who developed new visual images by a process of trial and error, while the leading artists of the 1960s were conceptual innovators, whose work embodied new ideas.

And Now for Something Completely Different: The Versatility of Conceptual Innovators

Art scholars have puzzled over the behavior of Pablo Picasso, Gerhard Richter, and Sigmar Polke - important modern painters who have made frequent and abrupt changes of style. Yet in each case the scholars have assumed this behavior to be idiosyncratic, and have consequently failed to recognize its common basis. Versatility is in fact often a characteristic of conceptual innovators, whose ability to solve specific problems can free them to pursue new goals. This contrasts sharply with the practice of experimental artists, whose inability to achieve their goals often ties them to a single style for a whole career. The phenomenon of the conceptual innovator who produces diverse innovations is an important feature of twentieth-century art; Picasso was the prototype, and he was followed by a series of others, from Marcel Duchamp through Damien Hirst. Versatility has furthermore been a characteristic not only of modern conceptual painters, but also of conceptual innovators in other arts, and conceptual scholars. Recognizing the common basis of this behavior increases our understanding of human creativity.