Nov 4, 2022

To sign or not to sign abstract paintings

I recently visited "Blue Poles" by Jackson Pollock. It is hanging in the Australian National Art Gallery. It's purchase almost destroyed the leftist government back in the 70's. Goodness, they paid over one million dollars!! (Now estimated to be priceless!)

Pleasantly surprised to see that he had signed his painting! 


"Blue Poles" Jackson Pollack 1953


I recently have been advised that "you don't sign abstracts on the front, because it interferes with the image."

My response is: signatures have always interfered. They have cut across the soft and sensitive paint of the masters, and sometimes taken a major role in the composition.


Self-Portrait with Fur-Trimmed Robe 
Albrecht Durer 1500

These large elaborate signatures were a form of advertising for the artist, especially on self portraits. This was probably the beginning of the signature tradition, and it evolved into a modest corner position.

The same applies today: it's a form of marketing yourself, as not all visitors to your patron's home will be familiar with your style. It's a chance for networking, and it is respectful to your buyer. They won't have to pull the painting off the wall to remember the artist's name. 




The Travellers, After Cezanne
Shirley Peters 2018

The fun with abstracts is that you can hide your signature somewhere in the surface movement, or just fill a corner. 

Let me know what you think in the comment section. 

Cheers

Shirley