To each his own

Now before you get your shorts in a bunch because you think I'm criticizing a crazy, old man's art, that's not what I'm doing. I'm pointing out the sujbectivity when it comes to the appeal of art today. I'm pointing out that as long as the "artist" is unique in some way, has lived a difficult tortured life, and some silly rich people care about it, then you could pass off the stuff my kindergartner did 10 years ago as valuable art....

TUSCALOOSA, Ala. (AP) _ Bent over or sitting at a table, gripping a ballpoint pen, marker or crayon, Frank Calloway spends his days turning visions from his youth into lively murals — and at 112 years old, the images of his childhood are a window to another time.

Drawn on sheets of butcher paper and sometimes stretching to more than 30 feet long, the works mostly show rural agricultural scenes, with buildings, trains and vehicles straight out of the early 20th century. And his colorful creations are gaining more attention in the art world.

The works by a man who has lived about half his life in state mental health centers will be part of an exhibit this fall at the American Visionary Art Museum in Baltimore. His caretakers have suspended sales of his artwork until after the show after finding out some of his drawings could sell for thousands of dollars.

"They are unique in that they are of a rural, agrarian South, and they speak to a time gone by," said Sara Anne Gibson, executive director of the Kentuck Museum in Northport, Ala., which hosted a monthlong exhibition of Calloway's works two years ago.

See, when you're buying art, what you're paying for is not the skill, creativity, and perspective with which the oil was applied to the canvas, or in this case crayon to paper, you are paying for how attracted you are to the story behind the person who did it, regardless of how well it was done.

My son could draw and color a train that was "better" than this one but, he's had a terrific life so far and nobody wants to pay money for a drawing by a kid who's hasn't at some point been homeless, or insane, or handicapped, or molested, or hungry, or in some other way "had it hard". I'm not saying there's anything wrong with paying a lot of money for art. It is axiomatic that anything is "worth" what ever somebody is willing to pay for it. That said, these snooty art critics and silly collectors with more money than sense, would have us believe that there's something special and superior about the art that they like. There is nothing special about any art. There is only cultish attraction to the artist and his personal story, nothing more. Yet-to-be-successful artists know this and I'll bet they act and dress in fringe ways to that critics and collectors will take notice and remark what a "tortured artist" that person is as they write a check for thousands for something a child could have drawn.

I've always wanted to take some of my kid's 1st grade artwork, have it framed, have him scribble his name left-handed in the corner, make up a story about a marginally sane, painfully shy, homeless dude who wears a beret and communicates with society through his pencil and crayon drawings because that's the only medium he had available, and see if a gallery owner would hang it up and sell it. Nutty collectors would love that back story, after which I could easily afford that wide screen down at SAM's I've had my eye on.