Page 56 - Studio International - April 1971

workshops, etc. We also attempted to structure *I demand that the artist should have the option of $6,000, which may be paid on an installment
a situation whereby most of the works of art to resign from the project at any time if he is not basis out of which no other expenses are to be
made collaboratively would become the property satisfied with its progress. lifted, such as plane tickets.
of the artist. To overcome any potential conflict *Also that the artist should have the option to *A realistic per-diem expense of $40, considering
between the property rights of artist and reject the 'principal work' or any work made that hotel rooms, eating out, need of a car to get to
company (the issue arises only with Patron does not meet his standards, and refuse the Glendale. This to be paid any time the artist is in
Sponsor, not Sponsor Corporations), we advised exhibition of the work by the Museum. L.A. working on the project including installation
artists concerned with ownership of works to *Problems in installation of the piece may arise time in 1970.
plan their work in series, so that they would and the installation of work by the Museum, if the One should consider that the artist may be thinking
acquire most of the results. At the same time, Museum exhibits it should be subject to the artists about the project in his home base before, during
companies were informed that they should approval. Also, if installation help is needed, the or after his execution of it in L.A. — this is time
expect artists to make multiple works if the Museum should pay the artist's trip to L.A. to not mentioned in the contract. Also that no studio
artists so desired. The decision as to what help plus expenses. facilities or housing arrangements are guaranteed
constituted the 'principal work' (the term 3. Paragraph 8 has been amended so that the or provided, and that a certain amount of time
stated in the contract for Patron Sponsor artist retains ownership of work made during the will be used up in just getting settled.
ownership) resided with us. project not integral' to the 'principal work'. *If it is at all possible to arrange, the artist should
We drew up a contract for artists to include Integral' should be defined as part of the work, participate in any tax benefits of the gift to the
these points and to make clear that they were or essential to it. Not for example preparatory Museum of his work. He should definitely receive
connected to the Museum, rather than the sketches or models. a percentage in the event the work is sold by the
company, in terms of monies and possible *Also, the artist does not sign over his copyright Museum, especially if it is to a private party.
obligations. of any work made during the project including I replied to Claes on 11 February, i969:
Most artists signed the contract, but Claes the 'principal work'. Let me address myself to your comments point by
Oldenburg dissented and raised some interesting 4 The artist takes a risk in exposing himself and point. The four starred points you make in '
questions. Oldenburg had been devoting his work to commercial exploitation promised in cannot be accommodated for any artist under the
considerable energy to the study of artists' the prospectus to industry: . . . promotional present budget of the project. Changes of this
contracts with dealers, galleries, printmakers, benefits can be considerable'. Not however to the nature would have to hold, of course, for all of the
etc., over the previous year. He is possessed artist. artists, and if these changes were made, the
of a forensic acumen that makes attorneys— *Therefore, publicity by the Museum or industry complications and added—unpredictable—expenses
including his own—envious. He wrote to me on must be subject to the artist's approval and/or would obviate the project entirely. Considering
27 January, 1969: guaranteed not to violate his best interests. An that all the expenditures made by the Museum,
These are my recommendations for a changed example of this occurs in the Times article where including preparations of different kinds and
contract for the artist involved in the Art and a spokesman for the industry (Disney) states his fund-raising, are for the purpose of a single
Technology project. I want to emphasize again expectations of what will occur: I think show-biz exhibition, and not for acquisition of works of art,
that the contract is an integral part of the is a good thing for an artist to learn. It helps him I think that the provisions for artists are fair.
collaboration of art and technology. To ignore to clarify his ideas . . .' Granted, this info was In regard to `2': The artist has implicitly the
contract-making would be to remain with the old obtained by the Times reporter, not from a release, `option to resign' in his contract, and to 'reject the
separation, where the artist says: I don't care as but seems to me ominous. "principal work" or any work made that does not
long as the thing gets done, a snobbish attitude 5 A reading of the prospectus to industry will meet his standards, and refuse the exhibition of the
which I don't feel fits the present and very indicate how much the burden of sacrifice is on the work by the Museum'. If you would like these points
American context of artist-industry co-operation. artist, not on the other collaborators. Industry stated more explicitly in your contract, we can
We're not engaged in creating property for the gets a tax deduction for help and materials do this. So far as installation is concerned, I know
County Museum, but working out terms which are provided, and presumably also for their donation you understand that in any exhibition of a number
bound to influence future collaborations of this of $7,000 to the project and their donation of the of artists' works, every artist could not and has
sort. `principal work' to the Museum. That they will never had the right to place his work where he
1. Travel. donate the work is tacitly supposed, though they wants it regardless of other works. However, in
I'll have to travel out to L.A. several times (see are also promised the benefit of receiving art works some cases, specific works may be designed with a
my proposed schedule letter of 18 January). (plural) which 'will exceed in value the total particular installation area in mind, and thus the
I have already taken my allowed round trip expenses of the corporation's contribution'. artist would of course have that location reserved
(coach ! which I changed to first class, paying The other 'collaborator' —the Museum, receives for his work. If you wish to select a site in advance
difference myself) just to meet with Disney reps. free a work of the artist it might otherwise have of the completion of your project, we shall do our
According to Museum further trips will come out had to buy, depriving the artist and his agent of a best to accommodate you. We would naturally
of my combined honorarium/diem (letter of sale. This gift comes with no strings attached and solicit the advice of artists as to placement of the
17 January). the right to resell—without any percentage to the works in any event, and if help is needed, of course
*I demand that each round trip be paid for, first artist—to anyone, after five years, the right to the Museum should pay the artist's trip to Los
class, not from the hon./ diem. exhibit or not, etc., all the benefits had they Angeles for this purpose plus expenses.
*I also demand transportation be paid for bought a piece. Re `3': Integral' clearly does not refer to
materials I may bring out and their return. Don't The artist receives no tax breaks, and is to work preparatory sketches or models; and there can
corporations get spec. rates ? at a reduced rate for three months, supporting similarly be no doubt that the artist 'does not sign
*Also that transportation back be guaranteed for himself in a foreign place at an impossible per over his copyright ...'
works not acquired by the Museum though made diem rate, and in addition, expected to pay his own Re `4': Beyond the safeguards taken by the
during the Museum project. transportation etc. Say he will work at Museum on the artists' behalf, it would be
*Also for the 'principal work' in the event it is approximately one fifth his normal rate. This is impossible to guarantee that some independent
rejected by the patron sponsor and the museum. not a 'collaboration' and is not set up to encourage journal will not negatively criticize an artist's
2. In working with the unknown quantity of an the artist to do his best, rather to get it over with work or in any number of ways 'violate the artist's
industry, the artist engages in a risk aesthetically, as quickly as possible, if he was unfortunate enough best interests'. I know you realize this and I doubt
and he must have safeguards which assure him to sign the contract. that you would want it otherwise. So far as
complete control over the result. *Therefore, I demand an increased 'honorarium' comments by corporation personnel go, which is
176