When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

You've reached your limit of one free article.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime .


Exclusive International news coverage

Ad-free experience NEW

Weekly digital Magazine NEW

9 daily & weekly Newsletters

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Free trial

30-days free access, then $2.90
per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch

Warhol Jackpot! Keep Your Day Job! A French Artist Takes On The "Dirty" Money Question

In a country where money is taboo and culture is sacred, French artist Aurélie Galois navigates the uneasy relationship between following your muse and paying your rent.

Image of the art piece called Balloon Dog (a giant red dog made of balloon) in a museum.

“Balloon Dog (Red)” by artists Jeff Koons, one of the highest-paid contemporary artists, installed at the exhibit “Icons: Worship and Adoration”.

Bettina Conradi/Instagram
Aurélie Galois


PARIS — "And...do you make a living from it?" That's the question I'm often asked when I say I'm a painter, before people even know what I paint. In a country where money matters are taboo, it's strange that artists are asked if they make a living from their art.

My response — "I'm not a painter to make a living; it's my life" — feeds the romantic vision behind this idea, a construction that I endure, like so many others, and which raises questions as intimate as they are enmeshed in society.

For Sigmund Freud, money is symbolically associated with excrement. In everyday language, the epithet "dirty" is often attached to money, reminding us how much Judeo-Christian culture has moralized our relationship with this dubious substance.

For artists, the question is even more complex. Certainly, Andy Warhol changed the game and glamorized the art of making money. But we will always prefer a Van Gogh, who never sold a painting during his lifetime, or a Donatello who, according to legend, hung a basket overflowing with banknotes in his studio for everyone to dip into.

Lure of success

For German philosopher Immanuel Kant, the argument of detachment serves to distinguish the beautiful from the pleasant. So, we expect the artist to be disinterested, motivated by the muses and certainly not by the lure of gain, and by extension, by glory, as Cyrano says: "But one does not fight in the hope of success! No! No, it is much more beautiful when it is useless!" Artists are also poorly off in terms of income: 48% of artists earn less than €5,000 per year from their artistic income; 52%, if only women are counted.

Adding up all of their resources, including those outside the field of art (jobs, food jobs, pensions, social benefits, annuities, etc.), their median annual income is €15,000 for men and €10,000 for women, according to Bruno Racine, who provides these statistics in "The Author and the Act of Creation."

Since the 19th century, when the artist’s salary started to be defined by the market and no longer by the commissions they received for their work, artists have been producing at a loss. For my next exhibition, I have produced 15 canvases, without any guarantee that I’ll sell even one, and without modifying my craft to make them more sellable, as if that could somehow corrupt their authenticity.

While being fully aware of the pathetic nature of this stance, I persist in it, because every time I've attempted to pursue more commercial work, it was a failure — and especially because it's often the least appealing artwork that sells.

Image of a woman wearing a black cardigan with holes in it.

Galois shares an image of her old cardigan on her Instagram page.

Aurélie Galois/Instagram

A patent for disinterest

Is it an unpredictable whim of the heart or the great organizational hypocrisy, described by Nils Brunsson, who would like art purchases to confer a certificate of disinterest upon the collector? Here's my final confession: I did not get into art for the money, nor did I do it to ensure a comfortable retirement. If that were the case, I would have been doomed from the start. Bertrand Lavier, a world-renowned French artist, receives a pension of just €890.

Without our work to invent, enchant or denounce, life would be much poorer.

But on the one hand, I enjoy selling my work. The strangeness of receiving money in exchange for an intimate expression is priceless, and I also need it to survive.

Some unions are seeking a guaranteed minimum income, where artists wouldn't be forced to seek supplementary jobs. The fact that everyone takes it for granted that an artist should have a day job in addition to their artistic practice, which requires an enormous amount of time for research, production, and communication, says a lot about the progress that still needs to be made to recognize the status of an artist as that of a real worker. Without our work to invent, enchant or denounce, life would be much poorer.

Aurélie Galois is a painter based in Paris.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

FOCUS: Russia-Ukraine War

A Russian Nuclear Bluff Or The Very Dangerous End Of "Mutually Assured Destruction"?

Retired Major-General Alexander Vladimirov wrote the Russian “war bible.” His words have weight. Now he has declared that the use of nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine is inevitable, citing a justification that consigns the principle of deterrence to the history books.

Photograph of a Russian Yars intercontinental ballistic missile system showcased during the annual Victory Day military parade.

May 9, 2023, Moscow: A Russian Yars intercontinental ballistic missile system during the annual Victory Day military parade.

Gavriil Grigorov/Kremlin Pool/ZUMA
Slavoj Žižek


LJUBLJANANuclear war is the “inevitable” conclusion of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. That's the opinion of retired Major-General Alexander Vladimirov, from an interview he gave last week to the journalist Vladislav Shurygin, and reported by the British tabloid The Daily Mail.

The retired general and author of the General Theory of War, which is seen in Moscow as the nation's "war bible," warned: “For the transition to the use of weapons of mass destruction, only one thing is needed – a political decision by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief [Vladimir Putin].” According to Vladimirov, “the goals of Russia and the goals of the West are their survival and historical eternity.”

Stay up-to-date with the latest on the Russia-Ukraine war, with our exclusive international coverage.

Sign up to our free daily newsletter.

That means, he concludes, that they will use all methods at their disposal in this conflict, including nuclear weapons. “I am sure that nuclear weapons will be used in this war – inevitably, and from this, neither we nor the enemy have anywhere to go.”

Recently, Christopher Nolan’s film Oppenheimer sparked outrage in India because it contained an intimate scene that made reference to the Bhagavad Gita. Many people took to Twitter to ask how the censor board could have approved this scene. A press release from the Save Culture, Save India Foundation read: “We do not know the motivation and logic behind this unnecessary scene on life of a scientist. A scene in the movie shows a woman making a man read Bhagwad Geeta aloud (during) sexual intercourse.”

My response to this scene is precisely the opposite: the Bhagavad Gita portrays cruel acts of military slaughter as a sacred duty, so instead we should be protesting that a tender act of bodily passion has been sullied by associating it with a spiritual obscenity. We should be outraged at the evil of “spiritualizing” physical desire.

Isn’t Vladimirov doing something similar in this interview? He is seeking to somehow elevate a (self-destructive, murderous) passion by couching it in obtuse terms such as “historical eternity.”

Keep reading...Show less

The latest