How Artists Make Decisions They Can Live With

Two Sculptures. Two Artists. One Question That Changes Everything.

Earlier this year, two sculptures of Donald Trump appeared in the world within months of each other. Same subject. Completely different artists, intentions, and outcomes. And together they make one of the clearest arguments I've seen for why knowing your values — before you take the commission, before you price the work, before any of it — is what holds a creative life together.

The first: a 22-foot gold-painted statue commissioned by crypto investors, made by Ohio sculptor Alan Cottrill. Late payments, copyright theft, directives to alter his work. He fought for his fee, accepted some interference, pushed back on other things, walked away with close to half a million dollars, spoke publicly about the chaos, and said he was satisfied. I believe him.

The second: The Orange Plague, by Danish artist Jens Galschijøt — an unflattering depiction of Trump as the King of Injustice, made for the COP30 climate summit. He had 6,000 miniature versions 3D-printed and distributed them free at conferences around the world. No transaction. Conversation was the point.

Same subject. A chasm between them in intent, method, and what each man was willing to do with his work. Both, by any honest measure, self-determined.

This is not a story about politics or whose art was better. It's about what becomes possible when you know clearly what you stand for — clearly enough to navigate a difficult decision without losing yourself in it.

The artists who find their footing are the ones who have asked that question honestly, rather than waiting for the market or the moment to answer it for them.

Full article at https://substack.com/@lynnfeasey