Why Artists Should Sign Even Their Worst Pieces
I recently acquired some artwork from an artist’s “archive,” meaning pieces that haven’t sold after a considerable time. Mind you, this is a successful artist, someone who has sold their work for thousands of dollars. So we’re not talking about work with no redeeming qualities at all, just not the masterpieces.

When I got the items home, I noticed that none were signed. So I asked them if they sign any of their work. The answer was “only when it sells,” and even then, on the back of the canvas. OK, I can respect someone’s creative wishes, so that was the end of the matter… or at least it was for the moment, until I got to thinking.

I’m not a professional artist but I’ve created a bunch of stuff over the years. And by years, I mean over the course of the 50 years that have passed since I started making stuff when I was about 10 years old. Yikes, you know you’re ‘up there’ when you tell stories in half centuries. I’ve even sold a few of my creations… one piece of jewelry, four sculptures, maybe some other things that I’ve forgotten.
A while back I started making a web page to catalog my stuff: http://jackbellis.com/art/. And the experience of doing that made me notice that I hadn’t signed most of my brilliant creations. So I went back and made like a “real artist” and put my name in the bottom, right corner of the paintings, and carved it into the sculptures. I realize now I didn’t sign a couple of works that are reproductions of other artists’ work. Other than those acknowledged ‘knockoffs,’ I guess I had the mentality, without even thinking about it, that it wasn’t ‘signable’ art if no one bought it. And I also noticed that this spectacular impressionist painting that we have in our dining room, done by a distant family member — an art school graduate — isn’t signed either.

I looked up the matter on Google, and found a smattering of opinions and rationales. There is the technical point made by some that signing a painting, particularly an abstract one, tells you which way to hang it. I’ll dismiss this as a mere incidental factor. And some people felt that signing a piece was a potentially unworthy expression of ego. And some argued about the sanctity of the composition, as if the signature would ruin the art. (Puh-lease!) But mostly, those who had arguments against signing artworks based their rationale on whether the piece sold or not, whether it was valuable, whether it was good enough.
And so, I am here to tell you that that is nonsense and that artists should sign all of their work. There is no mythical baseline of signature-worthiness. The only baseline is whether a piece is so bad that the artist destroys it. If you don’t destroy it, sign it. Or, more literally “identify yourself.” My issue is not with how you sign it, whether it’s your name or some weird symbol or other method… as long as the body of work can be tracked back to a creator. In fact, maybe I don’t even care if your “mark” can actually be tied to you; I’d probably be OK if an artist wants to be anonymous. If his or her work then became widely recognized (sought-after, paid-for, whatever), then all that really matters is that when another piece is uncovered with the same mark, it has that ethereal quality of attribution to a certain, unique creator, however anonymous.

This is of course a totally subjective matter; there will be no right-or-wrong proof of my argument; it is entirely opinion and feeling. I might argue that artists should sign their work because it is part of them. They can pretend there’s no connection between the art and the person, but I’m not so sure. OK, it’s not a strong argument.
But there is one aspect that is 100% objective. It goes as follows. Art is for one and only one purpose: enjoyment. (Let us please not get distracted and argue about utilitarianism. Even in a useful piece that is artistic, the artful portion is for pleasure, not utility.) And while the artist herself might enjoy her art, it doesn’t take an advanced degree to figure out that the hoped-for enjoyment is that of others, not the artist herself. It is not about you, the artist; it is about your audience. It has nothing to do with how impressed the artist was or is with the work. It has even less to do with whether someone paid for it. Perhaps when your creation leaves your care it will take a downward trip from atelier, to garage sale, to the Goodwill store. Or perhaps it will travel upward to gallery, and collection, and even museum. Presumably you made that art — even the piece that turned out to be your worst — hoping it would travel upward. Sometime down the road the people enjoying a work would like to know whose body of work it is. If they are in the business of art, they will get not just edification but other value… yes, maybe even that most tainted value, money. By not signing a work… as if behind some mask of embarrassment, it’s as if you are bringing a child into the world and saying “don’t blame me.”

Justin, sign your work… all of it.
