Submitted by Kftwrk, Mar 6, 2007 17:20

Just about everyone I know in the artworld who has dealt with Pierre has had some kind of "diminshed" experience. In Mike Kelleys case, it would be nice for the artist to have had some control as where such an important piece ultimately ends up. Especially considering Pierre never paid "full price" for the work only the production and then a nominal fee for the artist, probably a third of its actual value. Now the work get sold for a great deal to an unknown buyer and the artist gets nothing but a bad taste in his mouth. In my dealing with Pierre he often made deals that were pretty amazingly cheap but I agreed because no one else was offering to buy my work at the time. He always paid on time. He would often ask for one more work after the handshake deal promising to donate the work to Mamco (Geneva's contemporary art museum) Of course the work is now languishing in his storage or perhaps sold. He was never really for the artist as he is for the money. There are some collectors who care about the more about the artist than the money. I somewhat agree with the person from Metro Pictures, The one good thing about the auction is that for Jim Shaw this was a great oppertunity to set a good standard of where his prices should actually be, it is unfortunate that his gallery could not do this for him. Although it is possible he could care less what his auction prices are and cares more about finding a good place for his work, rather than a fickle collector who might just flip the work when the price is right. Mike Kelley and Jim Shaw are great artists. They deserve some respect from the stewards of their work. It is not only about the money. I understand Mike Kelley's feelings about this sale.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.