I am Invited to cover LeWeb3 07 in Paris next month and now working on the logistics of how to pay for getting and staying there (I’m covering the conference as a blogger - while I’m sure I could speak there as well - I didn’t ask for that).

As I mentioned in my Webmetricsguru.com post - I find myself dreaming up all kinds of things - and they often come to pass - though I can’t usually control the the timing and circumstances.

Wish me good fortune in my dreaming.

The New York times writes about Germany’s Black Years Seen From the Inside a show that’s now in Paris at the Musée Maillol in Paris through Feb.  The show examines German Verisit Art, yet its title, “Allemagne, les Années Noires,” or “Germany: The Black Years.”  

I wrote about Verism - German Portraits from the 1920s @ Metropolitan Museum of Art last year, actually, almost a full year ago - and it was one of the best shows at the Metropolitan I’d seen.

It seems like a lot of overlap between both shows though the Paris exhibition might focus also on paintings in the 1910-1920 date range while the New York show, didn’t.

There is also a significant number of Otto Dix’s work in both shows:

“…But perhaps a more persuasive explanation is simply that Germany lost the war. And in reality, more than the drawings produced by Dix, Grosz, Beckmann and others during the war, it was their caustic postwar take on the conflict that would prove memorable.

Annette Vogel and Bertrand Lorquin, the organizers of the exhibition, have addressed this by dividing the show into the war years, 1914 to 1918, and the postwar years of the Weimar Republic, leading to Hitler’s rise to power in 1933. In other words, for them the apocalypse continued through the 1920s, with artists drawing an unbroken line between defeat, decadence and fascism.

Of these, Dix was the most interesting. Like Grosz and Beckmann, he volunteered to join the German Army. But unlike Grosz and Beckmann, who were demobilized on medical grounds after barely a year, Dix fought to the end. And fight he did: he commanded a unit of machine-gunners and, as such, was engaged in the mass killings that he would later denounce.”

Were I in Paris now, I’d definitely go see “Allemagne, les Années Noires,” or “Germany: The Black Years.”

Perhaps I go should paint more and go to openings less; maybe it’s the wine and company that does it for me - maybe it’s the wealth of possibilities there - but sometimes I feel like I use the Art World as way of avoidance from facing my own work - of being with myself.  I wonder how many other people I see at openings are doing the same thing?

Anyway, tonight I went to a show titled ”A New Spirit of Progress” presented by Art for Progress at World Culture Open Center and found the atmosphere too controlled, too tame, though the work I saw there was good - as far as it goes - I was left with the thought in my mind of “why”?   Why about any of this work really stands out?  

It got me back to thinking about something I’ve been grappling with for a while - why do people buy Art at all?   My feeling is there needs to be a compelling reason to buy someone’s work - otherwise, there’s no real commercial value to it.

For a while now, I’ve been working on the theory of “community” and how an art community can affix value onto any work, which otherwise is valueless.  For example, if I want to think of one of my paintings as worth 500 dollars - that’s a declaration of value - but only when someone buys it for that is the value really declared (to the world) that the painting was worth 500 dollars.

But wait, that’s not enough - in order for paintings to be worth something to a large community - there needs to be several who also agree (citations) that my paintings are worth 500 dollars (or more) - meaning that it’s the community that really sets and confirms value to anyone’s work.

Getting back to the Art For Progress show - what I felt missing was not so much community (there was a community of Artists present, after all, the same artists and friends of the Artists, that want to display / sell the work) but of the wider community that can affix real value and liquidity to work.

That’s why I’ve often fell back on the idea that Artwork is done (by me) for self development - and not really to sell - or even to display.  Why?  It’s too hard to get real, widespread buy in for your work, or anyone’s work - so it’s not a viable path to making a living - but more of a pleasant surprise that works sells, when it does.

So…getting back to the Why?  Why this show, why paint, I feel it’s OK to show display work and being a member of the Art For Progress Collective is not a bad idea, the benefits seem worthwhile and they do good work for their members, that only a few of the members would largely benefit from it - those that can best leverage the community they’re allied with.

I think that’s true for many organizations - perhaps they help everyone a little, but some benefit much more because they can leverage contacts they make.

At least, that’s my thinking about Art Communities today - maybe I’ll feel differently at a future time - I’ll leave the door open to change of my opinion here - though what I saw tonight more confirmed my opinions than changed anything.