A look at the importance of the client-artist relationship

The importance of the client-artist relationship cannot be overstated. The artist biography film genre is somewhat smaller than you would think. Much like musical biopics like Elvis, there’s usually a lot of dramatic embellishment. Throughout history, artists have relied on patrons to support their work and provide them with the resources they need to create their masterpieces. However, the dynamic between client and artist has often been exaggerated in movies and television shows, leading to misconceptions about the nature of these relationships.

Full episode can be listened to here.

In this article, we’ll take a closer look at four examples of client-artist relationships in popular culture, and compare them to the realities of history. I’ll then give my thoughts on the subject based on my own experiences.

Diego Rivera and Rockefeller from the movie ‘Frida’

The movie ‘Frida’ tells the story of the Mexican artist Frida Kahlo, and her tumultuous relationship with fellow artist Diego Rivera. In the film, Rivera is commissioned to create a mural for the Rockefeller Center in New York City, but the project is ultimately cancelled due to Rivera’s communist sympathies. The portrayal of the relationship between Rivera and Rockefeller is one of conflict and tension, with Rivera openly criticizing the capitalist system that Rockefeller represents.

How Rockefeller and Rivera likely interacted in real life

While it is true that Rivera’s political beliefs caused some controversy during the creation of the mural, the portrayal of the relationship between artist and patron in ‘Frida’ is somewhat exaggerated. In reality, Rivera and Rockefeller had a cordial working relationship, and Rockefeller was actually a supporter of Rivera’s work. Although the mural was ultimately not installed in the Rockefeller Center, this had more to do with the politics of the time than any personal animosity between the two men. I actually think the film communicates this appropriately, but the dramatic nature of the way things ended is a little inaccurate, and their friendship likely did not end after this project was canceled.

My take on this interaction and managing personal conflicts with clients

So in this instance most people would assume that I would side with Rivera. Setting my own personal beliefs aside, Diego is in the wrong primarily because he chose to divert from an established approved sketch. The fact is that the client clearly shows reverence and respect for the artists beliefs, despite likely not agreeing with them. The artist put the client in an impossible position. I do believe that artists should have the freedom to express opinions that challenge patrons and viewers, but the conversation has to be had with good communication and mutual respect. Realistically the audience should respect the artists autonomy. The contemporary notion that an audience has some level of entitlement to the artist’s voice is inane and destructive at worst. I do draw a line at hate speech in art, but if an artist (or anyone) engages in this act they should accept accountability and an honest criticism. Long story short though, Rivera was in the wrong despite his body of work showing obvious political leanings, and he definitely engaged in self sabotage in this situation.

I’ve certainly had to navigate potentially challenging dynamics in commissions, luckily I have had great guidance from family and my professors at SCAD to know of the subtle art of communication and negotiation throughout the creative process.

Gertrude Stein and Picasso from Midnight in Paris

In Woody Allen’s ‘Midnight in Paris’, the character of Gertrude Stein is portrayed as a mentor to the young artist Pablo Picasso. Stein is shown as a wise and nurturing figure, guiding Picasso as he develops his unique style. The relationship between Stein and Picasso is one of mutual respect and admiration, with Stein recognizing Picasso’s genius from the very beginning.

Stein and Picasso in real life

While Stein did in fact provide support and encouragement to many young artists during her time in Paris, the portrayal of her relationship with Picasso in ‘Midnight in Paris’ is somewhat romanticized. In reality, Stein was known for her sharp tongue and critical eye, and was not above harshly criticizing the work of artists she did not believe in. Additionally, while Picasso was certainly a prodigious talent, it is unlikely that he was the unpolished diamond in the rough that the film portrays him as.

My take on this interaction

Despite the fact that This movie is obvious fantasy, I think it’s a fairly honest portrayal of their working relationship. Very few artists and patrons can have this honest of a dialogue. If anything Stein was probably a harsher critic of Picasso’s then this interaction would indicate. That being said I do believe these two genuinely respected one another. Picasso wasn’t always the most amiable person in the world. He was noted for a tendency to look down on and treat women relatively poorly. I However, he treats Ms. Stein with reverence and respect and not only for her support of his art. He truly sees her as an intellectual equal. Any interaction with an artist and a patron that can be at this level of respect is admirable, especially in the hands of a nicer person than Pablo Picasso.

Big Eyes tells a story of an unhealthy creative relationship, but there are teachable moments in their story

The film “Big Eyes” tells the story of Walter and Margaret Keane, and their complex relationship as artist and client. Walter Keane was a salesman who convinced Margaret to let him sell her paintings, which featured hauntingly large-eyed children. However, Walter claimed the paintings as his own and became famous for them, while Margaret remained anonymous. The film portrays Walter as a controlling and abusive figure who took credit for Margaret’s work, while Margaret struggled to reclaim her identity and artistic freedom.

The relationship between the Keanes is a prime example of the complexities of the client-artist relationship. This is a little different as Walter wasn’t really a ‘patron’ in the traditional sense, but he had some good business sense in some ways, and was not great in other ways. On one hand, Walter provided Margaret with financial support and had a strong understanding of promoting and selling art. There are some ways he sells art that any artist can take and maybe improve upon an a more authentic manner. However, he also took credit for her work and controlled her career in a way that was detrimental to her personal and artistic growth. Margaret’s struggles to assert her own identity and reclaim credit for her work highlight the importance of open communication and mutual respect in the client-artist relationship.

So, how does this story measure up to reality?

It is worth noting that while “Big Eyes” is based on a true story, the film does take some liberties with the facts. For example, it portrays Walter as being almost comically villainous, while in reality he was a more complex and nuanced figure. Similarly, the film exaggerates the extent to which Margaret was kept in the dark about her own art, while in reality she was aware of the situation and complicit in it to some extent. I still think it’s best to leave that interpretation open ended and say that she deserved credit for her work.

What sort of insight does this film offer?

Despite these exaggerations, “Big Eyes” does offer a valuable insight into the dynamics of the client-artist relationship. It shows how the relationship can be both positive and negative, providing artists with valuable support and resources while also potentially stifling their creativity and independence. By examining the complexities of this relationship, we can better understand the challenges faced by artists and clients alike, and work towards creating an environment in which both parties can thrive.

What I think of this movie’s portrayal of the Keane’s

Based simply on the information presented in the film, I think its obvious Walter was a master manipulator. Margaret ultimately got her due in court. I know that Walter’s family members have defended him in the past. The positive takeaway is that Walter did an immense job of selling the brand, even possibly to the degradation of the art. It kinda of does border on being along the lines of Thomas Kinkaid. Kinkaid is actually a much more morally dubious figure than Keane, having defrauded multiple gallery owners over the years, and just generally being an awful person. A trend that his company seems to be continuing beyond his passing.

As I already stated, I think there are some great tools an artist can use to run a business. Ultimately It might be good to use sound judgement and maybe a healthier and respectful dynamic. I’m not 100% the biggest fan of her art, but I recognize that it’s spawned a whole movement of similar genre painters that have had great success.

Lorenzo Medici and Da Vinci from the show Da Vinci’s Demons

This is probably the more fantastical interpretation of history on this list. Yes, even more than ‘Midnight in Pars.’ The relationship between Lorenzo Medici and Leonardo da Vinci is a central focus of the television series ‘Da Vinci’s Demons’. In the show, Lorenzo is depicted as a patron of the arts, providing Da Vinci with the resources he needs to pursue his work. Lorenzo is shown to have a deep appreciation for Da Vinci’s genius, and is willing to go to great lengths to support him. The man that would later become Pope Leo X was depicted as a stern man that was not above using his power and personality to keep Leonardo’s ego in check at times.

Who Medici really was.

While it is true that Lorenzo Medici was a patron of the arts, the relationship between him and Da Vinci in ‘Da Vinci’s Demons’ is somewhat idealized. In reality, Medici was a shrewd politician and businessman, and his support of the arts was often motivated by political considerations rather than a genuine appreciation of artistic talent. Additionally, while Da Vinci was certainly a brilliant artist and inventor, he was not the superhero-like figure portrayed in the show. Given the largely speculative nature of the show and the time period it was set in, the true nature of these individuals would probably be better left to other sources to determine the accuracy of this portrayal.

Given that this show takes massive creative liberties, what do I think?

This show shows the most obvious signs of over dramatization I’ve ever seen. Given how long ago this was set, it’s much more difficult to really asses how realistic the interactions in the show are to life. I will say that the scenes where Lorenzo openly challenges and calls out Da Vinci’s absurd nature are very entertaining. That being said, the Catholic church pretty much had total domination over the direction of art and intellectual development at this time. I don’t buy the idea that any artist, let alone Da Vinci, would openly challenge not only the wealthiest banker in Europe, but the future pope. We live in a world with a lot more social and artistic progress.

I can only say for the time these types of creative discussions for the time would have been considered revolutionary. the actual dynamics of these relationships were often more complex and nuanced than popular culture would have us believe. It is important to recognize that these relationships were not always characterized by mutual respect and admiration, and that artists were not always free to express themselves as freely as they pleased. Additionally, the motivations of patrons were often more political or financial than artistic. If anything the financial motive is stronger than ever.

Building a personal connection between an artist and a client not only builds friendships, it makes the art better.

Despite these complexities, the client-artist relationship remains an essential part of the artistic process. Without the support of patrons, many great works of art may never have been created. It is important for both artists and clients to understand the nature of this relationship, and to approach it with respect and open communication.

My own experiences have been very fruitful and positive!

I’ve had many different types of interactions with clients. Thankfully they have mostly if not all been very positive. To me its very important to balance including consideration for the needs of the client with your own creative inertia. I initiated a commission for the ‘Family Tree‘ paintings where I was asked to incorporate the color black into the art. This was a very pleasant and fun surprise as I would have mostly assumed that this type of color would not appeal to a client up front.

The commissions I created for a client that commissioned “Vanitas #1“, “Under the Angel Oak“,  Nebula, as well as a series of smaller abstract expressionist works probably gave me a push to grow more creatively than I would have without the client challenging me creatively.

The experience I have received from working with Sherry Hayslip Interiors also lead to me creating

one of my more iconic images ‘Passion and Reason.’ I was tasked with thinking about my paintings in an entirely new visual space and color scheme than I previously engaged. This resulted in me seeking to match the color sensibilities of Russian constructivist Kasamir Malevich’s painting and occasionally returning to a ‘white on white’ motif.

There has to be trust between the artist and client, but an artist should never be above processing feedback

As an artist at a certain point you should set healthy boundaries and have the confidence to defend your creative decisions. However, I would never encourage any artist to be hard headed or stubborn to the point of hurting your own business. I will say that some of the best forward creative developments I have had came as a result of having an open and collaborative dialog with a client.

Good art can take time, but it’s on the artist to run an organized business.

I set a very clear timeline with most of my paintings based on my process. I will admit a couple of projects have taken a bit longer than usual, and that usually happened when a deviation from my established process. The more I have moved outside of that process the more comfortable I have gotten switching up my direction, but never mid project.

One last word to artists

For artists, it is important to recognize the value of the resources and support provided by clients. While it may be tempting to view patrons as impediments to creative freedom, the reality is that their support can offer an opportunity for growth and to continue your practice. By communicating openly with clients and working collaboratively to achieve shared goals, artists can build strong and lasting relationships that support their artistic endeavors.

A side not to fellow artists. Always get a 50% deposit before beginning any commission. It establishes a good starting point and gets a positive commitment from everyone involved.

One last word to patrons of the arts

For patrons, it is important to recognize that every artist has a different process and set of values. While it may be tempting to view artists as mere suppliers of a product, the reality is that their work is deeply personal and often reflects their own experiences and beliefs. By approaching the client-artist relationship with an open mind and a willingness to collaborate, clients can help to create an environment in which artists can thrive and produce their best work.

Interested in starting a commission?