do we own it, or are we caretakers ?

[risingstar]

I generally look at a commission differently than I might published art. For example, if I were to buy the Ditko cover to Amazing Spiderman #28 and saw a "To Hubert" personalization on it, I'd probably be offended by what might appear to be the presumptuous nature of it all, as if the cover was made for that specific collector (which it clearly wasn't). However, if this were one of those dimeadozen commissions with a "To Myron" on it, I probably wouldn't care. However, I'd likely never buy it.

Ultimately, I feel published works have a greater tie to comics history than a commission does because a commission is generally done for that one fan whereas the published work has a tie to everyone else who has been touched by that piece of history in some way. In my mind, that moment between reader/fan and artwork is somewhat tarnished when someone completely uninvolved with that piece whatsoever feels entitled to put their name on it. That's just my take. I'm not speaking for anyone else so people are free to wholeheartedly disagree.

You'd hope the fan could find it in himself to just appreciate the piece for what it is without having to put his name on it or attach himself to the artist or to the historic moment, however, like some others have said, once the piece is paid for, the buyer can do whatever he wants with it. Hopefully, their fascination with seeing their own name or nickmame on the artwork won't make their way on to a piece that's special to you or anyone else.

[daikins]

I am sooooo sorry I had Dan Jurgens write "for Dave" on the Booster Gold splash page he sold me for $20 in 1987...
I ruined a historic moment! Stupid 14 year old me!!!!!

But seriously, I did kick myself when I decided to sell the page a couple of year ago... Oh well.

I bought an Oeming Powers 2-page spread a couple of years back. I looked away and when I looked back Mike had put a "to Dave" on it without my knowledge. Dang it Oeming!
Funny thing is that I collect Signed photos of actors, and I HAVE TO have those personalized. HAVE. TO. But with artwork, I don't want it... Signed books, I can go either way.
go figure.

[Fat Head]

Originally Posted by risingstar

You'd hope the fan could find it in himself to just appreciate the piece for what it is without having to put his name on it or attach himself to the artist or to the historic moment like a ramora, however, like some others have said, once the piece is paid for, the collector can do whatever he wants with it. Hopefully, their fascination with seeing their own name or nickmame (which is probably even worse) on artwork won't make their way on to a piece that's special to you or anyone else.

I pretty much agree with everything you said. It's your last paragraph that reinforces the fact that we OWN pieces though. Just because we're responsible and respectful with regards to the artwork, doesn't mean someone else will be. They can do anything they want to it without repercussions, which means we're all owners, not caretakers.

[risingstar]

Originally Posted by Fat Head

I pretty much agree with everything you said. It's your last paragraph that reinforces the fact that we OWN pieces though. Just because we're responsible and respectful with regards to the artwork, doesn't mean someone else will be. They can do anything they want to it without repercussions, which means we're all owners, not caretakers.

Essentially, yes. There's no standing to stop it from continuing to happen either.




P.S. I firmly believe that 20th century artwork, which includes comic artwork, especially due to its immence impact on American culture, will inevitably be welcomed to grace the walls of the most prestigious fine arts museums in our country. Speaking for myself, it's a shame that some of these historic pieces with have "To Felix" written on them, sometimes even on the actual artwork itself.

[MikeNegin]

Can a comic art restoration service possibly remove some of these personalizations through bleaching? I know they handle cleaning, tape removal, tears, stat reproduction etc but do they have the ability to remove something from the art without damaging it? I'm not really sure, but I think it's an intertesting thought......

or what about the possibilty of simply whitening it out; a lot of art already has areas that are whitened out by the artist; would doing that to a personalization (as long as it didn't interfer with the actual are) reduce it's worth?

[riprap]

I have a Jim Starlin and a Herb Trimpe personalized. I am happy with this. They are personalized to me by these great artists, they are in my home and I plan on keeping them. However, until I started reading these posts I never thought otherwise. I do see the point people are making about caretakers and the possibility of selling art in the future. I do like the fact that my favorite artist, Starlin, personalized his work to me, but in the future I might keep my name off of the art.

[daikins]

I think that there is a point with comic pages that you can personalize without interfering with the actual art: bottom of the page, top of the page, back of the page....
So if someone ever bought it from you, it could be matted out when framed. But really, it's not something that I would do on a page unless it really really meant something special to me. But there's so many pages of comic art produced...