The Unlimited Limited Series
Reading time - 12min
The Case with KAWS
Since I read the KAWS What Party catalogue from his exhibition at the Brooklyn Museum in 2021, I’ve been persecuted by this want to buy the KAWS despondent figurine, just like the one on the cover. The way this contemporary form of art was explained in the two essays in the catalogue, opened my eyes to a new frame of mind. The authors reference Duchamp and his ready-made revolution, pathing the way for Warhol and his unique entrepreneurial approach to the art world, who in turn, paved the way for others today like Koons and KAWS.
Certainly, these are essays in the artists catalogue, so they’re made to debate in favor of KAWS and his style of work. And whilst they succeeded in changing my mind on KAWS’s place in art’s history (liking it or not), I wonder if these explanations were too ‘museumy’, relying on an art history knowledge that seems to ring off brand for KAWS.
I’ll take a guess and say that most of the KAWS What Party catalogues were bought by KAWS followers, and yet, based on the KAWS following culture I see online, and the collaborations and activities KAWS ventures in, the authors do not seem to be writing to the average KAWS aficionado. The person who buys and follows KAWS does not appear to be the same person who goes to museums or galleries as a past time on a slow gloomy Saturday in January. A KAWS fan is closer to a sneakerhead than to an art history student (not that one can’t be both, but I am confident that’s unlikely).
What brings me to this notion is observing what KAWS is. KAWS is street style, KAWS is partnerships with Uniqlo, North Face and Dior, KAWS is Pharell, Nigo and Kanye, KAWS is big sculptures, KAWS is hyped product drops, KAWS is unlimited limited editions, KAWS is a brand.
I don’t know when this shift happened from artist to businessman, or if it was the latter all along, but buying a KAWS has become buying a Louis Vuitton purse with a loud logo, it does not mean you are interested in fashion, it just shows you want to be part of the Louis Vuitton club. My intention is not to take away from LV or KAWS, building such a brand is an enormous achievement, but I am focused not on the product here but on the impulse that drives the transaction between buyer and seller.
KAWS is not alone in this. Commercially glorified names of today like Basquiat, Haring, Warhol and Koons, are present in our retail stores like the classical artists are present in our churches… Another guess I’ll allow myself to make is the assumption that most KAWS fans know these names. They know Basquiat’s crown, Haring’s radiating kid, Koons’s shiny balloon dog and Warhol’s Marylin, but does their knowledge extend beyond their ‘Best Hits’? Have they attended an exhibit? Read a Wikipedia biography? … Do they care to know why they are considered great artists?
What is Inaccessible?
The essay tries to make the point that KAWS has bridged the gap between the inaccessible prices popular art commands and the budget regular people have to spend on art. According to the author, “KAWS’s artistic production has questioned many of the long-held assumptions about art and culture, especially the concepts of exclusivity and inaccessibility.” However, in my opinion, diluting and dumbing down the concept of art onto t-shirts and infinitely reproducible open edition toys is not making ‘art accessible’ it’s monetizing the concept of art in another way. Instead of selling 1 painting for 1 million, I sell 1 million toys for a dollar.
Art is not a passive experience. Experiencing art requires training, like everything does. To eat well, you need to learn about food, to get places faster, you need to learn how to drive, to have an aesthetic experience, you need to learn how to see. Why do we expect art to just be given to us. Art is exclusive and inaccessible, not financially, but intellectually. A way to democratize art is not to buy a Keith Haring t-shirt, or a $300 KAWS figure, but it’s investing time into refining your artistic sensibility, and supporting new artists.
There are plenty of original artists that are in their first years of career from which you could buy many pieces for less than $1000. You could buy one or two of their works that you like, support a rising artist, give priceless affirmation to another individual pursuing their dream, instead of buying one or two KAWS toys. But then you’d have to explain yourself. You’d have to tell the story of why you like that piece to an inquisitive guest, explain what about it you liked, maybe you’ll have to get personal, open yourself up to be judged by others on your decision to spend a considerable amount of money on something you just look at. Or, you could buy a KAWS piece, that needs no explanation, its instantly recognizable and people will say, “OH you have a KAWS, Cool”, and you can show off. Be a part of a club. No need to be vulnerable, no need to have studied anything or built an opinion, you just follow.
Not all people who buy KAWS figures are like this, I bought 2, because of what I think KAWS represents in the art world, I bought them as a critique to myself, as a proof of my own reflection, exhibiting them side by side to original art from unknown or lesser-known artists. That said, the KAWS buyer I describe above is no different than the very wealthy individual who buys a $50million Picasso or Warhol, instant recognition, their guests will say, oh you have an original Picasso, you must know your art, be a cultured person, when in reality no. Both these people are making art exclusive and inaccessible, the less than thousand dollar spender is using their disposable income to re-enforce a successful artists businesses instead of supporting the rising artists, and in doing so are putting hype around the more ‘prestigious’ and one of a kind, work of the same artist that can sell at $50million to the rich person who can say, look, I have the original of all those copies around there, I know art better.
The Production Chain
I have always criticized contemporary conceptual, ready-made, machine reproducible Art. It’s commercialization, its simplicity, its mindlessness, but then again, I realized it’s not the art itself that upsets me, but what we have made of art. I paid just above $300 for the What Party figurine from StockX. Half of what I paid for Oxygen, a sculpture from artist Helena Hoes that she made with her hands and wanted to personally pack and deliver so she could meet the person who would take care of her piece. I am sure KAWS himself could care less about who had his thousands of toys that he had made in China (or at the early stages of his carrier, in Japan).
I’m not quite sure what it is that boils my blood. Is it the simplicity of the KAWS figures? The craze for which they get snatched faster than they can be produced? Is having an idea art? Is being creative being an artist? Or is creativity just a characteristic of an artist?
He makes it look easy, better; he makes it look accessible. Something you don’t need to practice painting or drawing for decades, but just be bold enough to pursue your idea. In that sense I see KAWS more as an entrepreneur. But is an entrepreneur an artist, or just a characteristic that an artist must have?
KAWS did practice a lot, pursued graffiti art when it was not recognized. When it was just a passion. A form of rebellion against grey walls and surrounding stock advertisements. He went to art school and continued to draw, paint, and learn through his growth. What one gets with a figurine is a chunk of plastic filled with all the years of passion and work. A symbol that represents this defiance and the opening of another reality within the one that has been given to us. But how much can this tank of passion, symbolism and experience be distributed? There have been prolific artists in the past, but few like Koons or KAWS press play on a machine and pop out hundreds of toy releases. Change the pose, *smack*, do it again. Is that tank of artistry filling every single piece of work. Or has artist turned businessman and is following supply & demand basic economics for his brand. - He hasn’t even touched most of his pieces. If he were to hand sign it, the value would skyrocket.
I also learned what “Open Edition” means. Practically back in 2016 or so, KAWS started making and labeling his figurines as “Open Edition”, meaning I (the artist) am free to print as many figurines as I please, effectively making the piece always at risk of depreciation. Obviously, it’s in KAWS’s best interest to keep his art toys exclusive, but still it is not protected by the artists promise of limited edition.
Today’s Artists
I look at the tall white ceramic vase from Jonathan Adler in my living room, with long stoic faces all around. I reflect on its price (just under the price I paid for the KAWS) and it’s “Open Edition”-ness. You can walk into any Jonathan Adler store or go on the website and buy the vase. It’s considered ‘decorative designer furniture’ but not art. Yet, it’s very aesthetically pleasing to me. Don’t know to what degree these are hand or machine made (it claims to be handmade). They are made in China just like the KAWS figure. The only difference that separates them is their availability. Whilst both are technically available, you can always trust Jonathan Adler to have the Frida vase available at the store, or online, at the same price (inflation allowing). Conversely KAWS releases a limited amount at a time, without promise that he could re-release the same item or make it on commission for whom asks. However, it seems that there is a common practice for people to buy these off the shelf and flip them to make a profit. The availability of them in the secondary market is prolific. Especially for the open editions. If more people were to buy these because they liked them would there be less influx of them in the market? Or is this practice integral to what the figurine is? There would be nothing to prevent KAWS from continuing to manufacture them on the low and supply orders to these re-seller platforms like StockX and DDT, to keep them reselling at a higher price, an activity that is so integral to his figurines.
Who knows.
The main difference between KAWS and Jonathan Adler is that KAWS came out of the street art world, and Jonathan Adler from the pottery and design world, subsequently deciding to build their business model differently. If Jonathan Adler would make limited edition pieces and market them as ‘Art’, would they sore in value in the second hand market? And would they be considered art? Would he have his own solo exhibit at the Brooklyn Museum? Conversely, if KAWS re-opened a store and sold his open edition items freely, would his pieces seize to be considered art?...
Or is art bound to the artist? If one is not recognized as an artist then what they do can never be art, conversely, if one is considered an artist, is everything they make considered art?
What is what we decide to call Art but a reflection of the civilization we live in? A mirror to who we are and to what we dream of. If Art lives in the awkward realm between objectivity and subjectivity, then the What Party Figurine would acquire a different meaning depending on the circumstances it’s put in. The world it could open would be one of contrast, contemplation, thought provoking repositioning of contemporary concepts of Art and consumerism. The What Party KAWS figurine could stand as a symbol of these two concepts of art that clash and collide in my mind. A symbol of the fine line between creativity, entrepreneurship, and artistry. A symbol of art for everyone and how everyone dilutes the word and concept of Art.
…
… I saw a kid on the train, had to be in his mid-teens, practicing his graffiti tag on a small notebook with ring binds. He was drawing his tag with a green marker, repeating the same one on a page, trying a different more bubbly style on the next, and a more cubed style on the one after. His tongue moved in his mouth, sometimes slipping out. I recognized the behavior because my brother does the same when he’s concentrating on a videogame where he has to win. The kid flipped through the pages without raising his head. In that moment I thought to myself, “That’s likely how KAWS started.” An old worn purple hoody with paint stains on his sleeves, wide black pants with pockets on the sides and an old worn black back pack concealing his spray paint cans.
