Sunday, April 5, 2009

Art Publishing

Publish: to put a work into a material form for the marketplace. If a writer composes a poem and a newspaper prints it, that's publication. If the writer pens a novel and a business prints it, binds it, distributes copies to individual book stores, that's publication. If an artist paints a painting and a gallery hangs it on a wall where the public can see and buy it, that's publication of a sort. If an artist conceives of a graphic, a work on paper, say an etching, then prints a proof, then shows the etching to a customer who buys it, the artist is acting as publisher: because the etching is potentially a multiple original. When Rembrandt pulled an etching and signed it and sold it, he'd estimate how many good prints he could get before the etched grooves degenerated, the image lost clarity: say 7. So: he'd sign the etching and number it 1/7.

Modern printing allows plates to be made that will bear up under many impressions. So the art business, artists and galleries and fine art publishers, arbitrarily limit the number of prints. Editions of 10 or fewer used to be common. Then editions of say 30 became common. Then the Twentieth Century made editions of 250, 300, 500 common.

The Twentieth Century then also introduced the practice of prodding artists to sign reproduction of already famous images and call them "originals": Norman Rockwell, LeRoy Neiman, for example. The term original was degenerating: rapidly. I doubt it will ever recover.


This subject deserves a better treatment than I just sketched. I'll keep at it: make a good one eventually.

Fine Art publishing is an unusual business. The terms can be very confusing. People in the business can be confused by their own terminology. Don't expect help from lawyers: they don't understand it either. Defining things never helped much in my case: the people I was trying to communicate with, Gail and Murray Bruce, for example, my supposed partners in Gail Bruce imagery, would follow what I said for a moment, then revert to whatever understanding suited their own agenda (of raking profits and the hell with meaning, promises, ethics).

Let me come at it via examples. I, my company, PK Fine Arts, Ltd., published GH Rothe's mezzotint Interlude.
Gatja had worked the image up on the plate and proofed it, showed it to me. I liked it, said I wanted to publish the whole edition: meaning, I was promising her to pay her for one hundred singed and numbered mezzotint prints, plus a few additional artist proofs. She, as artist, could retain a few additional artist proofs for her own use: selling them, giving them as presents ... Artists are supposed to make no more than 10% of the edition size as artists proofs, but that's a limit much abused in practice.

I wanted to bring Interlude out at around $75 or $80, then stabilize the retail price at $100, then raise the price once I'd sold more than fifty of them. I don't remember what I promised to pay her: probably $10 each, with it understood that I could pay her over time so long as she got a fair chunk soon: a few hundred at least.

Dance of Tom I wound up paying her $20 each for the bulk of the edition. At first I'd paid her 25% of retail, when I could, after the customer's check had cleared (and after I'd paid Gail Bruce more than I owed her so she could deceive her husband about our "success"). In the case of that small mezzotint, Gatja had offered it to publishers, been rejected, then consigned parts of the edition (250 numbered prints plus 25 or so artist proofs) to various publishers: Lublin, Nabis ... After years she was still sitting with the bulk of them. As little cash as she was getting from me, it was still more than she'd ever gotten from anybody else (though Lublin had once given her a $1,000 check: for which they got tons of stuff).

Saturday, April 4, 2009

pk & GH Rothe



Interlude
mezzotint by GH Rothe


When Gail Bruce asked me to represent her art I was already friends with Gatja Rothe, the mezzotint master. Gatja had already consigned to me a portfolio of her mezzotints in hope that as Director of the Circle Gallery on Madison Avenue I'd be able to sell them to Circle chief Jack Solomon. I did show them to Jack, Jack didn't buy them. (Thanks to my having the art on hand I'd been able to sell one on a payment plan to the lead ballet dancer of the Met.) I wouldn't have let Gail talk me out of Circle Gallery and onto the street quite so easily had it not been for the additional backing of Gatja. The moment I announced that I was thinking of going independent, I had not only a couple of Gail Bruce serigraphs in my portfolio, I had Gatja's lifetime production of mezzotints, a few Ed Solol serigraphs, spare art by Will Barnet, and dozens of other artists who suddenly appeared out of nowhere to fill up my sales portfolios.

Dance of Tom
mezzotint by GH Rothe



Audience Favorites
mezzotint by GH Rothe


A Note on Money

When I find time I will explain how Gail Bruce promised me financing but the only person ever to actually give me any was Gatja: she bought my PK Fine Arts. Ltd.-mobile: a new VW bus. I paid her $100 a month, when I had $100, for years. Gatja waited and waited, while I fed her money to Gail Bruce, uncomplaining, I'd explained "why" to her. By the end of the 1970s I'd paid Gatja most of what I owed her: though what I owe her is debatable: Gail promised me backing, but actualy only delivered art, and there only in sluggish dribs and drabs. A lot of time and money was wasted: a lot of earn-able money was not earned: no financial lubrication.

But Gatja too sabotaged me as well as supported me. I drove to LA in the winter of 1974, taking PK inventory to sell out west. Gatja mailed me more art c/o Texas. I phoned her from Texas to tell her I'd received it: she told me — after buying my car for me and filling it with art — that I couldn't sell her art in California: she'd just sold an exclusive to Ed Weston!

Can you imagine. She invested in me, then pulled the rug out!

Ed and I were under each other's feet ever after. He could afford it; I couldn't. Gatja hurt me, herself, Gail ... all my artists.

Then again, think of this: Gail's husband was unsure about investing in his wife's art. He was unsure about investing in his wife's trusted dealer: me. Murray was always looking for investments. He made tons, lost tons. He could have invested in Gatja Rothe! and didn't. Armond Hammer, Hammer Graphics, bought Gatja away from all of us: me, Ed, Hugh McKay, all of us. Murray Bruce could have had big pieces of those millions. But then I've always been surrounded my morons.

Notes on the Images

I put Interlude at the top. I love this one best as it is the first Rothe mezzotint I ever published entirely by myself (and sold out entirely by myself). Dance of Tom Gatja had done years before I met her. A zillion other publishers had had their hands on it before I took over the bulk of the edition. Gatja gave me time, all the time I needed, to pay. I promised her $20 each. The first guy she'd offered them to declined to pay her $1! I sold the last of them at $1,000 retail. My own print was stolen: along with most of my framed Rothes, all dedicated to me: my Interlude 1/100 for example.

Audience Favorites was one of two editions I sold to a mail order catalogue out of Baltimore. That secondary publisher ordered 50 each. I made the editions 100. Gatja sold me the remaining 50 and 50: again, on time: again all the time I needed.

Friday, April 3, 2009

pk, Gail Bruce, more

Resurrecting Knatz.com / Personal / Stories / Theme / Business / Bruce

Summary first, details follow, followed over time by lots of details:

When Gail Bruce first asked me to be her graphic arts consultant and rep she promised me, indeed, she gave me, a lifetime exclusive. She shushed my protests that I had no capital, assuring me that her husband had plenty of capital. "Don't worry about money," she promised. But then, as early sales began to trickle in, she asked me to give her the lion's share of the income: so her husband would feel we were getting somewhere. Years later, after I'd paid her several times what I owed her, postponing payment to other, better artists, she was still asking me to pay, always more, so her husband could feel like he could afford to give up his lucrative commercial making and try for Hollywood film making: every commercial director wants to be Hitchcock instead. But my cheating on her behalf, lying at her request, had caught up with me. Other artists too wanted to be paid: and I had never paid myself anything.

When I showed Murrary Bruce the cancelled checks proving that I'd paid the Bruces $30,000 more than I owed, he ordered Gail not to give me any more art. He denied all our agreements: and he had the lawyers, the accountants, the BigMac cash flow. (He did reimburse the overpayment, too late for the capital to restore my company.) Gail answered no more calls, no more letters. Last time I saw her, in the Village, on the street, her art career ruined as well as mine, this former cover girl looked very old. Gail Bruce looked like a witch. But ever since I withdrew my endorsement, her art lay dead in the galleries. I cast a pall over it, a hex. She looked like a witch; I can actually be a witch.


This story begins a series of stories about Paul Knatz, Gail Bruce, and Gail Bruce art and graphics. I'm the one who made her famous. She's the one who more than any other started me on my own business. She's also the one who sabotaged me and my business more than any other: and that's saying something! I'd given her a glowing setting, I reset her as the wicked witch: galleries couldn't give her work away.

When I say "Gail Bruce" I'm likely to be referring more to a style than to the woman. Meanings will mix no matter the reference.

First, here's a scan of a photograph of the painting we first published as a graphic:


Now here's the artist. We used this image for publicity in the later 1970s.


Now, understand, when I met Gail Bruce she was a talented amateur artist. I introduced her to Charles Cardinale, Fine Creations, NYC: master serigrapher. What I sold as Gail Bruce to the graphics galleries was a material wedding of Gail's style and Charlie's craft. Here's Charlie posed by the Gail Bruce Pier Fisherman after adding the final color.


Understand most of all: Gail's paintings, her vision, her humor, the psychological depth of her seemingly simple images was entirely hers when we met, and when Charlie first cut the screens to print White Hat. But the images that then graced galleries across the country and around the world, from 1974 and onward through the 1970s was the work of a team: Gail Bruce, Paul Knatz, and Charlie Cardinale. Her mind made the image, Charlie made the image professional, graceful, and clean, and pk sold the hell out of them: convincing ordinary frame shops to promote them, not only to carry them but to display them prominently.

By the end of the 1970s our business marriage was proving to be betrayal managed by incompetence. Whereas I first promoted them, I then hexed them. Whereas I had kindled cheer in the gallery, I now cast gloom. Gail Bruce, the style, dropped like a rock from America's attention. Former fans who had made money on them would make a face and say, "You still have those!?"

Details will follow. As well as more examples.


After I had failed to explain to the draft board that I was a pacifist, after I had failed to explain to my graduate school the macroinformation in Shakespeare's Sonnets, after I had failed to get my inspired fiction published, after I had offered a cheap low-tech social networking data base, a prototype internet, and after the society had stood idle as my wife kidnapped our son — essentially so I could have no influence over his schooling, resourceless, all but homeless, I got a job: in the art business.

more coming, as promised


More Gail Bruce:


Dakota


Ballet Dancers


Beach Kids


Notes on the images:

At PKImaging.com and at Knatz.com I controlled the size of the digital images precisely. I currently having difficulty doing that here via Google.com. Those images that are too large to fit the blog column width I'm still wrestling with the code for. At worst I'll resize them in PhotoShop.

White Hat: I had to retouch the scan considerably. Gail's painting used large areas of solid color, very primary, very two-dimensional. Understand: this is a scan of the painting; not of the graphic which first established her as a graphic talent: an investment or sorts.

The artist: The scan is of an offset print, not the photograph: hence the graininess.

All of the scans are retouched. PKImaging.com, my online gallery, destroyed at my censoring by the US, never displayed art that wasn't retouched by me. My retouches though were always then approved by the artist. Most artists that I dealt with had little idea about digital imaging.

Dakota (the toddler seated at the piano) is of Gail's daughter.

Ballet Dancers and Beach Kids were published as tax shelters. I got Gail to sell the copyrights, the buyers gave me distribution rights and both of us some cash. Charlie just got paid for the printing. He was a functional partner but not a financial partner: he got paid upfront: if Gail or I took a bath, Charlie had been paid.

Final Color:
The final color in serigraphy is always black. You can look at the printer with a dozen colors down, look again with eighteen colors down; but until the black goes down few, even professionals, will see "anything." I could; but I soon learned to keep my vision to myself: or I wouldn't sell anything!


Other Notes: "I got Gail to sell the copyrights": If our efforts had gone anything like Gail promised, her promises made by her in her husband's name, but then revised without discussion by her husband — talented, a money machine, but ignorant: and far from bright, I never would have permitted her to sell a copyright. But Murray Bruce routinely sabotaged (unaware) his own (non-filmic) enterprises.

You'll see as I tell the story.

Thursday, April 2, 2009

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

pk Stories

I told a lot of stories at my home page. I was a key character in many of them, wasn't to any degree present in some of them. In most cases I meant to be illustrating some characteristic of society; not just blabbing, babbling.

After my arrest and censoring (2006, 2007) my parole officer continued to warn me against re-posting anything online, not even the huge amount of bye-kill, stuff the fed had not officially censored. Well, I've been slipping a few classic pk modules back online via my blogs, the one part of my former online presence not to have been destroyed by the FBI and the federal court. If I can continue I'll re-post everything, including the stories. Meantime some stories must be added: stories not yet told, and stories I hadn't yet lived or heard. I start a few of each here now.

First I'll tell one of the latter — one I didn't know till now — and I'll tell it under the title Gang Rape.

And stand by: I'm anxious to retell stories told at Knatz.com (and other pk domains) – that's a few hundred stories at least; but now I'm also anxious to tell stories about my arrest, my trial, my experiences in the half a dozen jails the Bureau of Prisons put me through.

Meantime, there are also stories I haven't even begun to tell yet. With Knatz.com still down in my struggle with federal censorship and oppression, I'll add new tellings directly here, hoping to integrate them with a restored K. later.


I'm relocating this section temporally in order to create room to post stories together in blog sequence, reverse chronology. I posted this originally on May 31: I move it to 2009 April 1. A business story will follow as 2009 April 2.


Organizational Note:

Knatz.com always illustrated philosophical and sociological points with stories: stories involving pk and stories merely being retold by pk. Then I started telling pk stories for their own sake, however many philosophical and sociological points they also adumbrated. I put them all in the personal section of Knatz.com, Knatz.com being basically of two main folders: pk Teaching (major) and pk Personal materials (minor) (though also essential). (A third folder kept meta modules: files about Knatz.com.) Then I added a section to my story folder for stories about others, stories where pk is merely a listener (and repeater). That was then.

But when I reorganized my / Teaching / Society folder so that / Teaching / Society / Social Order became Teaching / NoHier (for Anti (Factitious) Hierarchy) I realized that my personal stories about school, about church, about the army, were more philosophical and sociological than personal.

My deschooling materials had already spun off to their own domain, InfoAll.org. Reintegrated into Knatz.com they will go in the NoHier section: specifically under DeRegulate-DeProfessionalize-DeSchool.

Ah but then my blogs survived my arrest and censorship where my domains were all stricken — the fed knocked down AgainstHierarchy.org, thanks to its revenge fantasy: my family took over my bank account and my bills while I was in jail. But they didn't pay my ISP: and when APlus.net got the court order to censor AgainstHierarchy.org, APlus destroyed all my data! Then the Bureau of Prisons and Parole Board warned me against trying anything else online. (They steal their plariarized internet from me in the first place, then they tell me what I can and can't do on it: after the fact, by arresting me after I'd written what the Constitution was supposed to guarantee me I could do!

Anyway, my business stories, just following here, are all Resurrecting Knatz.com / Personal / Stories / Theme / Business /. My jail stories, starting 2009 Nov. 15 are all Resurrecting Knatz.com / Teaching / NoHier / HierCon / (Convivial Living vs. Hierarchical Imposition.)

2011 01 17 pk's personal stories about community (and lack thereof): about rentals, about landlords, begun in Knatz.com's Personal Section, will get some development here under 2010 August. I'll post them now as though I'd posted them then.