The Australian artist Hazel Dooney has published an interesting post about the royalties that artist should or shouldn’t receive when their works are resold by collectors. She mentions a painting that she sold when she was just starting out for $300, which would be worth nearly $30,000 now.
Here’s what she says about it..
“Droit de suite negates the significance of the collector in an artist’s success. Every person who buys a work of art is supporting an artist at whatever point that artist happens to be in their career.”
“Everyone who supports an artist by buying their work, especially in the early, ‘risky’ stages of a career, deserves all of whatever eventual profit there might (or might not) be”. Hazel Dooney
I have to agree that we probably don’t deserve to be compensated for the life of a painting. I wouldn’t refuse royalties either
To make it more interesting, I wonder if a collector can also be compensated for the losses they have suffered from investing in an artist’s career? A lot of young flash in the pan artists that are currently selling for impressive prices would have to start saving now.
>> Being an Artist