Capital you have to have some money to make art. When I started in the 1960's you could do alot with a small amount of money. Art school at the art institute's college was under $2000 a year! In the art schools you were pretty much left alone, I remember Ray Yoshita was my 4th year sponsor and I saw him only once at my semester critique. It was just this chance to make things outside the framework of a professor or advisor, it was our chance to see how we dealt with freedom. It was productive and fun it was a good place to leave undergraduate studies.
Money sometimes small amounts can make an artist a better artist not just freedom from debt but you just don't need to run around trying to keep a head of your debts. My expenses then (1963-67) were minimal. Compared to now I lived on next to nothing. A tube of cadmium red paint was $1.25!! One of the cool things about S.A.I.C. was that our academic classes were taught by professors from the University of Chicago at the UofChicago extension hard upon the Chicago River on Michigan Avenue. Some of those teachers were great teachers inspiring and held up a mirror on how we learn and what we choose to learn. I remember this psycholoy professor who paced back and forth in the classroom like a fox. He was a very handsome African American, very fit like a runner. The minimum wage in 1963 was $1.25 , I had a full time job in a commercial arts studio 40 hours and my take home was $ 37.10 yes less than a dollar an hour for a schlock commercial art job! That's when art school
looked like a better deal. I saved money working in a silk screen printing place, it was a good job money wise but it was a toxic nightmare. I saved enough to go to art school - people lived on alot less back then. And people took risks, traveled more -more love affairs. More drugs more sexual activities ,headbands and beads. This hippy thing went on and on - I often wonder if was a hippy? I did have long hair and I listened to the guitar based pop lps! Of course in San Francisco I was a grad student, earnest and full of aesthetic yearning. I was in art school that was utter fraud. I had a 90 year old anatomy professor who was completely bonkers. I had a whole year with this woman her cologne was awful Sunday School Teachers lilies of the valley with way too much alcohol. Plus she was so old born in the 19th century!! She'd been teaching anatomy for artists for decades. It just seemed totally absurd. who drew, people copied it was Andy Warhol everywhere, a huge permission was writ large by Warhol. And we ran with it. Money makes the world go around. And Andy Baird understood that we score success by dollars, smae premise plays fro Jeff Koons artists everyone evaluated by dollars. I tried to talk about this at the Walker when I spoke about Sigmar Polke exhibition, my very first remarks were about the economic support behind those art works it's hard for me to see a level playing field for artists these days or maybe ever. An international artist like Sigmar Polke has a fortune at his disposal to make his art with, these days he has the Golden Touch. Why is it that Polke or Koons et al famous wealthy artists Damien Hirst spring to mind - is it fair that so many artists are poor? And that clowns like Damien Hirst and his ilk live il dolce vita when many artists choose between food or paint.? Seems like the rich artists should be more generous. After all fashion does change even Larry Poons might rise again and set auction records for 1960's abstraction. Thanks just stick your donation in my mail slot.