Search

A gallerist in Berlin once told me, after looking at my whole portfolio for maybe ninety seconds, "the work is very intelligent, but I cannot sell intelligence." I was furious for a week. Now I use it as a filter, honestly. If someone says the opposite I get suspicious. So I want the lines. Not the worst insult necessarily, just the sentence a gallery person said to you that stayed, the one you now repeat to yourself in the studio or repeat to other artists. Could be cruel, could be the one good thing anyone ever said about your work. Tell me yours. And what you did with it.

Not the rejection, the sentence. The one that stuck. Mine came from a woman in Paris who looked at three of my canvases for a long time and then said, "You paint the light very well. Now paint something that is not about the light." I was furious for a week. It took me two years to understand she was right, and I still hear it when I catch myself making a beautiful nothing. So what is yours? The one that stung and then turned out to be useful, or the one that stung and still stings. Tell me which.

I had a gallery in Marseille ask me, politely, for "the same but bigger, and more blue." I said yes because I was thirty-two and flattered. I painted it badly, hated every session, and it sold in three weeks. I still wince. So, honestly: when a gallery asks you to repeat yourself, do you do it? For money, once, and move on? Or do you refuse and risk the relationship? I have changed my answer over the years and I am not sure the new one is better.

Spent three weeks pulling a six-colour screenprint edition of 40. Zinc white over a warm grey, the registration had to be perfect or the whole thing read as mud. Got them all numbered, signed, wrapped in glassine. Then the gallery calls, cheerful voice, to tell me they've sliced the margins down to fit their standard 50x70 frames. Every sheet. My margins. Gone. So now the image sits flush to the edge like a cheap poster, and I have to write to 40 people and explain that the edition they bought is technically a different object than the one I made. Half of them won't notice. The half who notice are the ones who'll never buy from me again. The thing that's actually eating me is that I can't decide if I'm furious about the work or about the fact that I said thank you when they told me. I heard myself do it. Thank you, of course, no problem at all. Printmaking is supposed to be the medium where I control the exact specifications. The whole point. Same plate, same paper, same pressure, repeatable, documented, honest. And it still only takes one person with a paper trimmer and a tidy idea of what a frame looks like.

For three days I've had a pale streak in every riso print coming off the drum, right through the middle of the image, in exactly the same place. I redid the master. Twice. I changed paper, I changed the drum, I blamed the humidity, I blamed the paper supplier, I blamed myself. This morning I finally get a loupe on the screen itself and there it is. A hair. Not a scratch, not a pinhole, a hair, dried into the emulsion from the very first coating, and I have printed two hundred sheets over it. Two hundred sheets. Some of them were decent. All of them carry my own hair like a signature I didn't sign. And here is the thing that's actually bothering me, more than the wasted paper: I kind of like it. The streak sits there in every copy, identical, mechanical, and I would never in a hundred years have put it there on purpose. It is the only mark in the whole edition that wasn't a decision. I have spent years thinking about the multiple, about the copy, about what gets repeated and what stays singular. Fine, theory is cheap. Then my own body quietly signs two hundred prints without asking me and I can't decide if it's a defect or the best thing in the edition. I could reprint. Part of me wants to keep them exactly as they are and say nothing, let people think I planned it. Anyway. Off to buy a loupe that actually works, and to have a word with my head.

I spent 60 euros boosting one of my best still lifes a few years ago. Got about 800 new followers in three days. Felt great for exactly one afternoon, like finally the machine was on my side. Then I posted the painting being finished, the one people actually respond to, and maybe thirty people saw it. The 800 were just bodies passing through. They liked the ad or they didn't, and they were gone. I think some of them never even unfollowed, they just stopped existing. Meanwhile I put a blurry photo of my badly lit corner of the studio where I mix my palette, no caption worth reading, and it did more for me than the whole 60 euros. There's no logic to it. You can't buy the thing that works because the thing that works is accidental and it doesn't scale. I still teach students who beg me to explain the algorithm to them, like I'm hiding the formula. I'm not hiding anything. I keep a notebook of what landed and why, and the reasons don't repeat. Bof.

Small thing but it took me three weeks to get here. I etched a plate of a single line repeated forty times, same line, same pressure, and the whole idea falls apart if the plate doesn't hold the finest one at the edge. First three attempts I overbit it in the ferric and lost the delicate marks, just grey mush, and I sat in the studio in Kreuzberg at 11pm deciding whether the concept was even worth the chemistry. Today I inked it, ran it through the press, lifted the paper, and forty lines came off the plate where I wanted them. Forty, not thirty-eight, not smeared at the corner. I don't know why this one hit harder than a sale would. Maybe because nobody asked me to make it. Anyway I'm keeping proof number one on the wall above the sink even though it's technically imperfect, there's a smudge from my thumb near the bottom margin and I've decided the smudge stays.

I've spent the last four days pulling test strips of the same plate. Same zinc, same ink, same paper, and then small deviations: pressure, dampness of the paper, how long I leave it in the ferric. Fourteen of them now, taped in a row above the press. The problem is that number nine and number twelve are better prints than the edition will be. And they are not the edition. They are the accidents of a Tuesday. If I try to chase number nine I will spend a week failing to make it again, and if I don't chase it I have to accept that the thing I like most in my own work is a thing I cannot repeat. This is supposed to be the whole argument of my practice, the multiple, the democratic copy, the print as something that exists in many. And here I am in the studio romanticising the one sheet that got away. I feel like a fraud about twice a day. I know some of you will say: keep the strip, show the strip, that is the work now. Which is a clean solution and I do not trust it. It feels like when you cannot finish something so you frame the sketchbook page. Anyway. Number nine stays on the wall until I decide. Possibly it stays there forever. The wall is getting crowded and I have started to avoid looking at it when I walk past, which is probably my answer.

Drove out to Matosinhos at six this morning with a box of paper I'd coated the night before, and did a run of six photograms on the flat rocks below the fish market, using the tide pools as my trays. Two came out. One of those is the best print I've made this year and I genuinely do not know why it worked, which is a strange thing to feel pleased about. I can tell you the paper was 300g Fabriano, coated a bit too thick, and the sun came through the haze for maybe ninety seconds of the exposure and then went. That is all I have. The other four are in the bin, and I'm not sorry about it. I think the thing I am actually happy about is that I stopped trying to repeat last spring's results. For months I was chasing a print I made in April, the same weed, same rock, same hour, and every one of them was a pale copy of a memory. Today I just put the paper down and let the sea do what it does. Anyway. Six sheets, two prints, one that might be something. The rest of the day is for sleeping in the sun like a cat.

Not the rejections, they're grand, you get over them. I mean the one sentence that got in under the skin and stayed there. Mine was a woman in a city gallery about six years back. She looked at a stack of my hare prints for a good long while, then said "these are lovely, but where's the pain in them?" I drove home fuming, giving out yards about it to herself at the kitchen table, and then about a week later I realised she was dead right and I'd been carving safe. Changed how I work entirely. I still don't know whether to thank her or not. So go on, what's yours? Could be a slag, could be a compliment, could be something so odd you couldn't make sense of it for months. The one you caught yourself repeating to other people.

I pulled thirty trial proofs of a two-plate etching this week, over three days, same plate, same pressure, and the first twenty-nine went straight in the bin. Not bad prints. Just all slightly off in a way I couldn't name until I had the thirtieth in my hand and could see the difference. The thirtieth has a slip. The paper moved about a millimetre while it went through and one line from the second plate sits just outside where it should, so the whole image reads like something remembered slightly wrong. That's the one I want. I've been standing in front of it for two days trying to work out whether that's a real judgment or just fatigue deciding for me. The thing I keep circling: in an edition, the slip is the error. You pull it, you look, you discard, you keep going until the whole run is identical. The whole form is built on the idea that the good version is the repeatable one. But the actual object I care about here is the one that can't happen twice. Maybe that's not news to anyone. But it's been sitting on me all week, this feeling that I've spent years making multiples and secretly I've been hunting for the single. And I chose a medium that refuses to give it to me.

The room is for a mid-size Kunsthalle, opens in November. I gave them a budget in the spring: 40 000 CZK for materials. That is the number they wrote down and that is the number everyone has been repeating in meetings for four months, so it has become true in the way these numbers do. Actual materials bill so far is 118 000. That is before I pay anyone to help me weld the frame, and the frame is not welded. Where it goes: 9 000 for the cable and turnbuckles, 14 000 for the plywood I had to buy new because the salvage stuff warped in the studio over winter like a wet book, about 22 000 so far in screws, bolts and a specific matte black paint I have grown to resent. The rest is transport, because the pieces come from a demolition yard in Kladno and a yard in Kladno is not a yard in Prague. Each trip is a van and a person and a day. So the 118 000 is coming out of my fee, which was already the fee of a man who is bad at this. Nobody at the institution has asked me a question. Not the curator, not the director, not the woman who does the contracts. I think they assume I know what I am doing. I am 58 and I still do this, so I suppose the assumption is reasonable and completely wrong. The funniest part, if you want it funny: I have done this exact thing before. Probably four times. Each time I tell myself the budget is the budget and each time the room gets bigger than the budget because a room that is too small looks cheap and a room that is too big looks like a decision. I have never once gone back and said the number was wrong. I do not know what that conversation sounds like. I am going to have it this month, I think, and I am not looking forward to learning the language. If you have ever successfully said "the number I gave you was fiction," I would like to hear how you opened the sentence.

sold a little lidded pot at the market last Sunday for €60. handbuilt, caña color glaze that came out almost exactly how i wanted which basically never happens. woman who bought it posted a photo on instagram, three people messaged me that night asking for "something similar." i quoted them all €75 and they all said yes. which is great obviously. but i keep doing the math and after clay, glaze, two firings, the hours of throwing and trimming and the one lid that warped and had to redo... that €60 piece was maybe €9 an hour. and the €75 ones are gonna be worse because now i'm self-conscious about repeating myself and I'll probably take longer. the thing is the €60 piece got me three sales. if i'd priced it €90 would it have done the same? i genuinely don't know and that's the part that keeps me up. cheap prices get you seen, but you can't live on exposure unless someone else pays your rent. my grandmother keeps telling me to charge more and she's 84 and has never sold a thing in her life, yet somehow she's right. anyone else ever had a "cheap" piece accidentally do more work for you than your best priced one? or am i just bad at this.

Sold a set of three watercolour sketches of houses off MG Road to a regular client last month. Flat ₹6,000 for the set, which felt fair at the time because it's a nice round number and I priced it on the spot without thinking. Then I tallied up the actual drawing time, not even counting the two mornings I went back because the light was wrong. Twenty-one hours. That's ₹285 an hour before paper, paint, and the frames I threw in as a "goodwill" gesture because they're a repeat buyer. I keep telling myself the goodwill matters, the relationship matters, the next commission matters. And it does. But I did the same maths my old architecture firm used to do on billable hours and I winced. The worst part is I know exactly why I did it. Round numbers feel easier to say out loud. I'm still scared that if I quote ₹9,000 or ₹10,000 for a set, someone will just go "okay, no thanks" and I'll have lost it. But honestly, the client who haggles over ₹3,000 is not the client I want anyway. Still haven't raised my price for the next set. Working up to it.

ok so I've been painting the same window in my apartment for basically the whole eight months I've been full time. same frame, same light, same cracks in the plaster. people keep asking when I'm gonna do something else and honestly??? the more I do it the less I want to. it's not about the window it's about how the light changes the whole thing and I never catch it. today at like 5pm the sun hit the ledge and turned everything this weird honey color and I did a wash that I was SO sure was gonna be the one and then it dried and it's wrong. again. but my mom called while I was staring at it and she said it sounds like I'm learning the same way I did when I was a kid drawing the same horse over and over. I don't know if that's comforting or if it just means I'll never be done. probably both. anyway if anyone else has a thing they paint on repeat for no good reason tell me I'm not insane. also the honey light is still sort of there if you want to come look

I finally raised my rate after almost a year of being stuck. I paint pet portraits in watercolor (I know, I know, but people really love their dogs) and I was charging €90 for an 8x10. Did the math on one and it was about 14 euros an hour after materials and the days I spent redoing the eyes. Embarrassing. So I went up to €125 and I was SICK about it for a week. Convinced nobody would book. The first person to take me up on it was a repeat client, the one who commissions a portrait every time her dog does something cute, the person I was literally scared to lose. She didn't even blink. Just sent a reference photo. And now I'm annoyed at myself for how long I sat at a number I secretly knew was too low. Fear of pricing yourself out is so loud and the actual evidence was right there the whole time. Anyone else got one of those "I waited way too long to raise it" moments?

Every winter, around January, I paint the same three things without planning it. My daughter's hand on a tablecloth from when she was small. The corner of our bedroom in the grey morning light. A pear that sits on the same cloth for weeks until it rots and I have to buy another one. I didn't notice the pattern until last year. I thought I was just stalled, repeating myself. But my husband said, why would you stop, these are your prayers. Anyway. I painted the pear again this morning. It's not for anything. No show, no sale. Just the same pear in the same light and I still haven't got it right.

ok so this is embarrassing and i'm probably the only person who does this but when i'm mixing colors, like really sitting there trying to nail a specific green or getting a skin tone right, i have a playlist i made that's literally just the first 30 seconds of songs repeated. like the buildup part over and over. i don't know why it works but my brain just turns off the "am i doing this right" noise and i can actually feel what the color needs. my partner walked in the other day and was like "...is this the same song?" and i had to explain myself and it sounded insane. but the color i mixed after that? genuinely the best warm grey i've ever made. so i'm not sorry hahaha does anyone else have a weird little ritual that sounds dumb but actually does something for your work??

I cannot paint in silence. It feels like the room is waiting for something. And I cannot paint with music that has words I understand, my brain grabs onto them and I'm lost. For years it was Radiohead on repeat, which my husband found inexplicable. Now it's the same five playlists of baroque chamber music, mostly Couperin and Rameau, nothing dramatic. The rhythm of it gets into my hand somehow. If the tempo changes too much I notice. Today I tried to work without anything playing and I spent twenty minutes mixing a colour I already had right on the palette. Just staring. So I put the headphones on and the painting started behaving. What do you listen to that you'd be embarrassed to admit? I'll start: I know every word of Kid A and I don't even like it anymore. It's just what the paint wants.

I spent eleven years painting before I had a gallery willing to represent me. Not for lack of trying, mind you. I sent portfolios, made appointments, attended openings, did all the proper things. Nothing. What finally worked was a letter. Not an email, a proper letter on good paper, after a small show of mine got a modest review in a regional paper. I wrote to the director of a small natural-history gallery two states away, enclosed photographs of my actual work, and said I thought we might suit each other. She wrote back within the week. We worked together for thirteen years. I still wonder whether it was the letter, the timing, or simply that I stopped trying to impress and started stating plainly what I could offer. How did you land your first gallery? Was it persistence, a lucky introduction, or something you'd never repeat?