Today's Financial Times includes a very interesting, and rather long, piece on Annie Leibovitz. The article skillfully leverages reporting about the photographer's financial and personal issues into an examination of the art world. The article does explore Leibovitz's entirely earned reputation as a diva and as an asshole. (Not mentioned in the piece are the vendors, the "small people," Leibovitz routinely stiffed.) Had the article stopped with the petty gossip about the photographer, the piece would not have been a strong one. Instead, the writer wisely and thoughtfully portrayed why Leibovitz's travails and difficulties were met with the art world's silent, but well-known nod of approval.
Curiously, the article asserts Leibovitz's prints do not generate large selling prices. It was astonishing to read that her prints are worth far less than $10,000, while other "name" photographers easily earn ten times that amount for a print.
Of course, a British newspaper broke the story. The New York-based art media has too much at stake to touch the Leibovitz story, especially her embarrassing near-bankruptcy and the unflattering perspective on her personality. It's true The New York Times ran a worthwhile story around the time Leibovitz was sued by a creditor. It's also the only time the newspaper has done so in Leibovitz's career.
However, Leibovitz has discovered a hard lesson about life in New York: it's one thing to be fashionable, but it's another to be respected.
No comments:
Post a Comment