Submitted by Chris Prentice, Mar 22, 2007 15:36

There is no rule in the free market saying that art collectors have to care about where the work they purchase "ends up" as much as, or more than, as its market value. If Kelley -- or any other artist -- is so concerned about lies and deception in art sales transactions, then I suggest replacing handshakes and promises with legally binding contracts that define the terms of resale and allow for recourse when deals sour. Or put your art where your mouth is. Blacklist collectors like Pierre who repeatedly "diminish" the experience of artists. Actively protect your interests or do business somewhere else.

This sounds like another case of artists wanting to benefit from the free market, but whining about it when they suffer the consequences of not taking responsibility for or conducting business in a way that protects them from its vagaries.

Pierre is simply a smart, unchecked business man. He negotiates a good deal (by recognizing opportunity, and understanding/taking advantage of the seller's pain points), pays on time, and plays the market for what it's worth. If you want to reign in a man like that, you have to play in his arena.

I'm reacting to what I read here. Maybe this article doesn't tell the whole story. Maybe there were contracts and lawyers or artist reps saying that they acted in Kelley's best interests. If that's true, then someone needs to expose the whole picture.

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