Sinanation

To tell you the truth I didn’t know much about Annie Leibovitz until the media and most recently the New York Magazine got a hold of her financial problems. Apparently I was impressed with her photography all along, having seen the covers of Vanity Fair and other ad campaigns.

Long story short Ms. Leibovitz is a very successful photographer who has not managed her finances as well as her work. Her story reveals a simple fact and a rather questionable conflict. The simple fact: Not all of us are good financiers and most of us are blessed with only one great ability. For Ms. Leibovitz that is photography. The rather questionable conflict: Once we reach a certain amount of fame and credibility we tend to forget about the concept of money and how easily dispensable it is (One is exactly the same as millions. It is so hard to keep and so easy to spend.). Over-consumed with fame and over-assured by credibility we try to find solitude in the private part of our lives, usually through luxury and the things we have been yearning for the most.

When Sarah (Leibovitz’s daughter) started eating solid food, a rigorous journaling policy was instituted, in which every bite and bowel movement was to be committed to an unlined black notebook purchased from the Swedish stationer Ordning & Reda. Kellum regularly ordered replacement books from Stockholm so that the journaling could easily continue from one book to another. Once, when an order got lost in customs, Leibovitz insisted on having two notebooks sent from Stockholm via a special type of courier service called “quicking.” It was essentially like buying a seat for a parcel on the next plane. The shipping cost alone came to $800.

The effects of fame and credibility are more visible in the case of an artist who excels in a solitary world of imagination. The true artist works to create a vision, not to earn his/her way in life. Acumen, insight and support are what an artist yearns for. Approval is appreciated. Fame and money are only the by-products of a natural cycle.  In reality, one can’t and shouldn’t be able to value a completely subjective work he/she has put his/her heart and soul into. A photo for Leibovitz might be valued at millions by her, but it will be much less for Conde Nast, which has commissioned it.

Accardi was stunned by the number of work prints Leibovitz would order, and apparently so was Condé Nast. After Accardi printed 300 oversize work prints of a Roseanne Barr shoot and billed Vanity Fair some $15,000, he received a letter from Graydon Carter himself, informing him that after this job, he’d be paid for no more than 50 such prints. “Like I was going to tell Annie that?” Accardi says with a laugh. “She would’ve boxed my ears.”

It is clear that Annie Leibovitz is going through rough times because her abstract world of vision and art finally clashed with the sharp realities of our capitalist world. It is suffice to say that she is only human and it could have happened and will happen to anyone as long as this rather questionable conflict exists in our universe. Let’s just hope that we will always have loved ones around us who will poke us and ring the alarm bells (hopefully before it is too late) once we lose focus and rationality.

If you have time I recommend you read the New York Magazine article “How Could This Happen to Annie Leibovitz” at http://nymag.com/fashion/09/fall/58346/

The media has been crying out from the rooftops, alerting us of a huge global economic downturn. The increasing fuel prices, decreasing consumer spending, the scarcity of rice (one of the most important sources of nutrition of third world countries), the fattening trade deficits and the stronger than ever tropical storms. None of them are foreign to us, but when all get together on the stage big question marks about the future of our bank accounts start to appear on top of our heads. It is in the human nature to always come up with a good survival plan whatever the threat is. Yet what makes this long lasting threat so grave is its unpredictability. The current economic downturn has widened the gap between the rich and the middle class by more than anyone could have imagined and it seems the art market is the biggest evidence to this. Asian, Irish and American contemporary artworks have been flying off the charts in auctions in the past couple of months. Christie’s and Sotheby’s have been posting sales that beat expectations, while the newspapers print the gloomy articles on skyrocketing fuel prices, the banks that caught their pants on fire and increasing number of bankruptcy cases. Something does not add up in this current mist we are in. On one side we have people paying millions to decorate their walls and on the other we have people selling their cars and switching to public transportation. I look forward to days of serenity and balance.

A very interesting article in New York Times titled “The Image is familiar; the pitch isn’t” caught my attention today. The article is about the artists’ accusing advertisement agencies and global brands for stealing the ideas behind their original artworks. The difficulty of protecting the whole creation behind art is revealed in the argument. The conclusion, which in my opinion is the best section, touched a very important point. None of us actually steal anymore. We borrow to make the previous better and let the future generation take on from there.

A professor at Purchase College revealed “Culture is about ongoing borrowing. It is about taking images, ideas and motifs and opening them up to new users.” I completely agree with this argument. With all the technology that surrounds our lives today we have entered into an era of mass absorption and consumption. We came to a point where we can no longer accuse anyone for stealing, borrowing or misusing an idea (especially the idea behind an artwork) unless that person confesses the crime.

If the artist starts questioning the agency that is claimed to steal his/her idea, couldn’t the whole society accuse the artist for stealing from its unique culture? Unless the artist succeeds in creating a trademark for his/her own work and directly represents his/her point of view in an idea borrowed from the society at large, it becomes almost impossible to claim rights for something that was never owned by anyone in the first place. There is not much left, but to accept the fact that we are all borrowers of ideas. If there is no ownership there are no thieves.

I guess the only safe way for an artist to make sure he/she gets credit for everything that relates to his/her creativity is to make the work visible and easily accessible by the public on the internet and the media. Only than can we remember and acknowledge the original founder of a borrowed idea.

Just like its name suggests this perfectly engineered sound creature is shaped like a nautilus. It promises to be around long enough and take its place as one of the rulers of design and sound just like its muse the nautilus has been around the oceans unchanged for millions of years. The Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus speaker was the work of B&W scientist Laurence Dickie. This attractive and unique speaker was first introduced by the British loudspeaker company in 1991. Known as one of the oldest and most prominent loudspeaker manufacturers in the world, B&W was established as the seed of a promise made between two friends, John Bowers and Roy Wilkins while they served together in the army during the Second World War.