Letters: Plea from the garret

Letters: Plea from the garret

Sir: Natasha Walter believes that the creators and consumers of art are primarily motivated by money. Artists want to make products that sell for vast amounts of money; viewers want to look at art that cost vast amounts of money (Comment, 5 July).

Anyone who decides to become an artist in order to become rich needs to be certified insane. Only a tiny handful manage to make a living out of art: most have to support themselves by teaching and other poorly paid part-time jobs.

Moreover, many of the most famous artworks of the Nineties - from Damien Hirst's cow to Rachel Whiteread's House and Marc Quinn's blood head - were extremely expensive and time-consuming to make. At the time, the artists and their backers were taking a big financial risk. Hirst effectively financed his meat pieces, for which there was and is a very limited market, by making paintings. Even Warhol - Ms Walter's Great Satan - only started to make serious money in the late 1970s. By and large, commercialism starts when artists stop taking creative risks, and instead become formulaic.

Ms Walter also complains about artists dining with PR executives and giving interviews to Vogue. Perhaps she is right, but I trust that when her next book is published she remains unavailable either for interview or for haute cuisine, confined to her garret.

London SW11