|
 |
Sanford Smith is the founder of Works on Paper. Catherine Yu-Shan Hsieh is an associate editor at NY Arts.
Dan Budnik, William DeKooning, 831 Broadway, New York [the day Franz Kline died], 1962. Silver Gelatin Print. Courtesy of Peter Fetterman Gallery.
Catherine Yu-Shan Hsieh: What inspired you to create Works on Paper? What do you hope to accomplish with this annual event?
Sanford Smith: I thought there was a need for a show that focused on all art that was created on paper: watercolors, prints, drawings, photography, architectural renderings, and so on. In visiting galleries over the years, I discovered every gallery had a closet that was stocked with works on paper but had no place to display it properly because the value of these works was far less than paintings. Every artist in history has created works on paper whether they were studies or finished pieces. What Works on Paper has done is focus collectors, curators, and dealers on this huge inventory of work created on paper.
CH: This is the 20th year you have been doing Works on Paper. What are the differences and similarities between this one and the previous editions?
SS: Over the 20 years we’ve been doing Works on Paper, the main differences from the early years are that we had far more old master prints and drawings as well as more 18th and 19th century work. Today we range from old masters to contemporary, but the bulk of what is exhibited today tends to be from the second half of the 20th century to contemporary.
CH: What criteria do galleries that are featured in Works on Paper usually possess?
SS: The galleries who exhibit in Works on Paper have to apply for participation. We basically vet the gallery’s reputation and criteria for the way they do business through recommendations of exhibitors already in our shows who know the prospective dealers.
CH: What is key to establishing a good relationship with art dealers?
SS: In our shows we believe that we are working for each individual dealer who exhibits with us. They are paying us not only to rent a booth, but to also have us cater to them. If a problem arises, we try to fix it immediately. Our staff is there to serve the exhibitors, to be a buffer for them with the various trades that work on the show, and to represent them properly to a discerning collecting public.
CH: You yourself first went into the art field as a dealer. How has that affected your appreciation of art?
SS: I began my career in the art field in an unorthodox way as a dealer predominantly in American folk art and American marine paintings, coming to an appreciation of 20th-century art and contemporary work much later in life. Today my tastes have grown and changed to where I am very comfortable with art of the 20th century as well as contemporary work.
CH: How do you gauge what is good art and what is not? In your opinion, what constitutes promotion of art?
SS: Good question. I know there are certain things that I think are awful when I see them. I can’t understand why people pay large sums of money for things I consider to be junk or kitsch, yet the art world is such that everyone has different tastes and what may be garbage to me is a fabulous piece of art to someone else. Obviously it is totally subjective. The value of art is totally determined by the marketplace: supply and demand, what’s fashionable, and how good a job the artist’s dealer has done in marketing the work. The promotion of art is the secret to some artists’ success and why other truly wonderful artists are never able to sell anything. Galleries put their money, their knowledge, their connections behind certain artists and these are the artists who tend to succeed.
CH: As art fairs mushroom, it is sometimes easy to think art has fallen commercialized. How would you react if someone says, “The involvement with money debases art?”
SS: I don’t think money “debases art.” I think we lose track of true values based on some of the prices being paid for works of art that are bought without regard for the true quality of the work and is purchased more on hype, name recognition, and promotion than it is for the art itself.
CH: Looking back on these two decades, how do you think has Works on Paper fulfilled your dreams and goals?SS: Works on Paper has achieved what we set out to do 20 years ago, which was to bring into focus the vast array of quality works on paper that had existed from the old master period to today but had never really had a chance to be seen because they were always considered to be “minor works” and not major works. If anything, we have proven that works on paper can hold their own against the greatest art produced throughout history.
