Rock Stars vs. Art Stars

Rock stars have Rolling Stone magazine. Where is a parallel publication for artists?

I must confess that I subscribe to and enjoy Rolling Stone magazine. Why? It gives an old fart like me a chance to catch up on what the young folks are listening to and I love the attempt at their funky fresh design look. The magazine is HUGE in the music industry and of course, getting on the cover was immortalized in the Shel Silverstein song "Cover of the Rolling Stone" made popular by Dr. Hook and the Medicine Show.

There are other music magazines as well that specialize in educating and promoting various musicians, bands, and styles of music. So why are there no Rolling Stone-type magazines that promote artists?

Perhaps the biggest difference between visual artists and musicians is that most artists (unless you're a photographer or print-maker) can't crank out a few thousand CDs for sale at $15 a piece. But visual artists still have a tangible product for sale and can potentially take that work on tour just like a band.

It is sad and interesting to me that musicians are able to reach the masses but that artists have not reached out so well. There are magazines about artists and for artists but they are either super esoteric or are only about the small percentage of Art Stars who live in big cities and are represented by the best galleries.

Until now. Charles Saatchi of the UK is launching a virtual gallery online that will promote unknown artists in a non-juried setting. That means this site will be available to everyone. I like this approach as it allows for more random art stars and will help to promote the careers of artists based on the quality of their work, not their connections.