Continuation Painting with Richard Prince

Continuation Painting with Richard Prince

there’s just lots of different things that I do. And sometimes I spend a day
doing a de Kooning painting. And then I’ll spend the
rest of the day doing a nurse painting. The next day I’ll
do a photograph. And the day after that, I’ll
do a hood sculpture. And nothing ever really
looks the same. It really depends upon
the subject matter. The subject matter sort
of dictates the look of the final thing. I moved to New York around
1973 or something. And then I left around
1986 to come up here. I wanted the exact opposite
of New York. I didn’t want anything
in between. I wanted something that
was really exotic. So I had never really
been in the country. In fact, it really kind
of scared me at first. This is basically pretty
much of an extreme. We live at the end of a
dead end dirt road in the middle of nowhere. I’ve been able to build
this environment here. It’s like a little town at
the end of the road. And you can do different
projects. I’m sort of interested in
building buildings and fooling around with architecture, which
is something I couldn’t do in the city. I mean, sometimes I’ll go for,
like, five or six days, and the only person I’ll see is the
FedEx guy, or the UPS guy. It’s not about collaboration
up here. You’re pretty much
on your own. I like the idea of just
getting lost. It can get bad up here
in the winter. I mean, it can really
drag on you. It’s mostly the ice storms,
where you really can’t move. It can get to you. So this is one of our local
establishments. We can grab some chow here. We’ve got this restaurant in
town that opens Thursday through Sunday. And that’s it. There’s no gas station. There’s no grocery store. There’s nothing. AMANDA WILBER: There’s not
really much to do in the town. He’s a good customer. We serve breakfast and lunch. And usually he gets
a Philly steak or grilled cheese with tomato. RICHARD PRINCE: Cheesesteak
with some potato chips? -Cheesesteak? AMANDA WILBER: And chips. -And potato chips? RICHARD PRINCE: Yeah. AMANDA WILBER: I did a photo
shoot with him about 2000. Made the front cover of a
magazine called “Purple.” I haven’t really seen a
lot of his artwork. I’ve heard that it’s
very unique. RICHARD PRINCE: You
know, I have these impulses and these desires. And I just go ahead and do it. I mean, the art world likes to
be hammered over the head with the same thing because they
want to feel like that’s what you do. And they want to be able
to say, OK, that’s what he or she does. I don’t know why the cowboys
are works that people really want. And I don’t know
why the nurses. I mean, certainly the nurses– I have no idea why. This is the actual,
the original cover for that paperback. I sort of mess with it
intervene, with it, contribute to it, continue it, and
make it my own work. -So tell me about them. RICHARD PRINCE: Right now, I’m
working on what I refer to as a de Kooning painting. Basically, it’s something I
started doing a couple of summers ago. It’s gotten to this
point right now. I’ve always liked de Kooning’s
women paintings. It started off with
a book of his. And I just started
drawing on it. And I would just sort of
continue to draw, just use him as a starting point,
add stuff to his. Anyway, I just started fooling
around, and one thing led to another. After I did the books, I started
to make collages. So it’d be like a one of his
women on the left, and one of my men on the right. So that was my contribution. Then I send this out. This is what I get back. And it’s pretty rough at
this particular point. But basically, I know what I’m
going to do with this. And then it goes from
here to here. It’s sort of like a trial and
error where I’ll put five or six different arms and
legs, just trying different rhythms out. Bring this hand down
here and crossover. Put a kind of Picasso-like
foot. You know, it’s just kind of a
new way of dealing with the figure, this idea of the
photographic part and the drawing part fused together. I’ve never really cared about
how the public has perceived my work. I could care less. It’s really good that people
collect my work because it means that I can make
other work. We can go in this room here. You’ve got to kind of
squeeze through. This is another workspace. These are paintings that
I’ve kept for myself. A lot of these are just
variations on the joke paintings that I started
doing jokes in 1986. And the joke paintings were
really kind of monochromatic– just two colors, color on the
background, and the joke was silkscreened in a color. And then they got very
painterly, like this. This is probably
six years ago. I mean, the reason why I painted
them was I wanted to present the radicality of the
subject matter in a very traditional way. That’s all. This is about 3,500
pounds of clay. And all it rolls back,
and it rolls forward. But this is a model, a clay
model, for the a Ford GT40. For me, a lot about what I think
about is, I guess, you could talk about in terms of
this idea of continuation. That all it this is really a– it’s something that’s added
on from what has been done before me. And the idea of buying a book
and calling it yours is something that you have
to give yourself permission to do. Obviously, someone else
can’t do it for you. I mean, a lot of people would
probably say, well, wait a minute, you really
can’t do this. You can’t go out, and buy a
book, and sign it, call it yours, and sell it. But for me, that’s
very easy to do. It’s not really about being new
as more as about this idea something continued. I’ve always liked this road. This is like my little museum. I always liked the way
it sat in this field. It floated in the sea of grass,
which I really love. We can go in if you want. It’s sort of like, I like the
idea of a space that’s not necessarily a gallery or a
museum, that’s more like a domestic space. And the idea that you get when
your eye is looking at a piece that looks out. And it sees stuff outside
the window. And it’s independent
of anything. I really took my
time with this. And I thought about what
was going to go in it. I mean, this place was
really screwed up. It had been used as
a hunting lodge. And the guy died like
halfway through. I mean, it didn’t
have a bathroom. It didn’t have any walls,
or bedrooms, or– it was pretty nuts. And I really liked the idea
that it was abandoned. I had my eye on it for
years and years. I used to ride by
and look at it. And there’s something about
an abandoned house. It looks like it has
a life of its own. And then I put about 11 or 12
different pieces of art in it. And that was it. It’s enough. And then I sold it,
the whole thing. You got the whole thing. I’ve got my Sid Vicious
paintings here. These are called
cluster flies. They are kind of the
domestic problem. Yeah, I’ve got to clean
up these flies. Someone broke in here. Well, nobody stole anything. RICHARD PRINCE: Yep, for now. And that’s my ’73 Barracuda
that’s permanently parked. I guess the original paint
is coming through. I used to drive this thing. And I guess you could
eventually make an appointment. You’d be able to come up
here and maybe have some lunch or something. I was going to use this land–
it’s about 80 acres. I was going to have a festival,
a little music festival, every summer. And we were going to
build some stages. And I was going to invite
people to perform. But don’t think that’s
going to happen now.


  • ladmladmn says:

    The skill is in coming up with the art. It's not about painting the most realistic painting. Realists do that. I like this kind of art and don't care too much for realistic paintings or whatnot. It's all personal preference I guess.

  • Andy Nelson says:

    I hate the whole "emotion" part of art. I consider myself an artist, but, I don't make it my life. It's just something I enjoy. I can't stand the whole "art life" style. It seems like its full of boring, overly educated people, who are very book smart. Like a bad girl friend.

  • DR Donut says:

    i dont think you have a very good understanding of art

  • D Quinn says:

    Exactly! Totally agree with you.

  • D Quinn says:

    I never said that it "wasn't allowed". After all, there isn't a set of rules when it comes to creating art. I simply don't care for this kind of "art"…

  • mugushi54 says:

    Skill isn't profitable for art schools becuase so few people are. Produce "modern art" like a drive-through produces hamburgers and you've got a big business. It's called supply side economics. Convince people that something is viable by flooding the market with it.

  • DesertArizona says:

    I can't get into contemporary art. Anything post-1970 has no value to me.

  • TheBoomer697 says:

    how long till he starts using real human limbs?….a bit creepy..yet interesting

  • Vera Lucille says:

    That is an amazingly ignorant statement.

  • DesertArizona says:

    Oh yeah? Why?

  • themrjones says:

    So I'm assuming the drugs are brought to him.

  • Vera Lucille says:

    Not all art that's been made since 1970 is like this, and to think that is extremely ignorant. Get out there, man. You might be surprised.

  • Paul Christian says:

    a lot of surrealists and postmodernists do show technical skill. dali was a surrealist, picasso was a surrealist. and even more contemporary artists like jake and dinos chapman, or damien hirst. just because something looks haphazard, or too "easy" doesn't mean it necessarily was. i'm trying to say that it's more than a bit of a generalization to say that "few" surreal or postmodern artists show skill in their work.

  • DesertArizona says:

    Get out there? I've been dealing art for over 10 years.

    I'll compromise, let's say post 1980. Only about 10% of accessible contemporary art in the past 30 years has any REAL value.

    That world is mostly inhabited by liberals who shit in a jar or make a mosaic out of used heroin tin foil. They put nothing of value into their art, its just doodles that sort of look neat.

  • HeimEier12 says:

    What do you think. I say that.

  • Royal Zak says:

    have you ever seen a Dali painting, I don’t particularly like his art but regardless, they’re still skilfully painted.

  • M070RG0A7 says:

    I really enjoyed this documentary, and Richard Prince's art work. I found it pretty funny though, the area where Richard lives is similar to where I grew up. Makes me laugh how foreign it seemed to appear to him, LOL city people.

  • hmy 6 says:

    Basically everyone who either hires concept artists or illustrators or is one? In any field you have to spend at least a few years developing your skill in order to get a professional level where people are then willing to pay for your work. It's no different for concept artists/illustrators.

  • hmy 6 says:

    I'd rather see something beautiful than the circlejerk that is the world of fine arts. If an artist has a good bit of technical ability, it can't help but to shine through in even really surreal works.

  • hmy 6 says:

    Duh, Picasso did traditional realism before he started doing surreal stuff, but even his most 'out there' paintings still show an understanding of foundations. And all the other artists show their skill through their work. But so many others use the label of 'post modernism' pioneered by these famous artists as an excuse to be uncreative and lazy with their work and make no effort to improve their own ability, cheapening it for everyone else who do thoroughly think their works through.

  • hmy 6 says:

    Who even said anything about realism? Have you ever seen the stuff artists like kawayoo do? There's more out there than just post modernism and photo realism.

  • Maddie K says:


  • hmy 6 says:

    the two are not mutually exclusive in any way at all

  • Arsenie Novalenco says:

    You know, the USSR regym did a great job in those countries! We don't have even a piece of racism. It's so strange that the country with reputation of "the most free country in the world", has such a bad educational organization that KKK can still breath.

  • Arsenie Novalenco says:

    Insulting is not an argue… You're the one who believes that USSR was a very bad thing, right? Are you american? Have fun while watching! If you won't have it, than you should think about upgrading your mind a bit – getting more clever, Clever Boy.

  • Arsenie Novalenco says:

    Predictions for 2013! Russian satire! (English subtitles) – I recommend you to watch this video. I believe that won't understand a joke out of it. So please, don't insult people – you're showing your stupidness.

  • whalefish83 says:

    utter elitist bullshit

  • Philippe Sauvie says:

    Art doesn't have to hinge on any mastery of technical ability in this age. The artist is in control of expression and there are more options for expression than in past epochs. Pretty boring all the same.

  • hopp says:

    I like some of his work but he is disingenuous, insincere and pompous in this interview. He seems also to take his incredible wealth for granted, whether that he's from a rich family or is actually self made I'm not sure but he acts like a brat.

  • misternylon says:

    The difference between artists and the rest of us mere mortals seems to be that we have the same goofy ideas but they at some point have convinced others to part with enough cash to fund their whimsical and often purile vision.
    Teenagers the world over have been denied the opportunity to do stupid shit like make a Ford GT40 out of clay and it all boils down to money. I like some of his work but am turned off by the startling lack of continuity, it smacks of a rambling mind skipping from one weak idea to another. Chopping up a bit of De Kooning and some porn photos, well I would expect that from a college project to be honest.

  • crazyhog09 says:


  • reymont cantil says:

    great artist. obviously people are entitled to their opinions, but before people launch attacks on someone's art, why not try and learn more about what you're seeing? he uses pictures of dekooning, marlboro men, biker girls, old cars, paperback books. why? a lot of contemporary art involves an investigation where the viewer sometimes has to solve the rest. its not just spoonfed images- that is what truly bad art is. also: dali was terrible.

  • Mateus Lages says:

    So many ignorant people here calling his art bad, bad art… I'd like that backed up with some knowledge to validate you're opinions.

  • AL SAULSO says:

    art is becoming more "ADD" less keeping to a certain style and pattern. I love that, it gives into impulse!!!

  • Alba Whiteman says:

    The genius of recycling others' works.He sounds a bit bored

  • verbindungsfehler says:

    not stressed but depressed

  • Roso says:

    THIEF. Simple as that. I've studied art for long time and I can recognise the difference of a true artist and a simple thief that is making money with the work of other people.

  • Pablo Renteria says:

    He is a thief a FRAUD a sun of a bitch

  • patric shaw says:

    so boring and basically sad person

  • Chris Regan says:

    Such a deluded man !!!  
    2:02 Here's where I do totally agree with him…I like the idea of him getting lost too !!!!!!!!!!  
    Just my opinion, so fuck off to the inevitable whingers before you even start.

  • RJ Bradbury Photography says:

    It's not about collaboration so I just steal other peoples stuff.

  • coolbuddydude1 says:

    I'm wondering why people shell out tens of thousands of dollars to buy this work.
    Are they just speculating? Trolling the art scene? clueless? Or is his works really profound?

  • Jesse C says:

    Truly an artist. A bullshit artist.

  • cramulh4o says:

    fucking thief… this guy is a joke.

  • Steven Noblin says:

    Richard Prince come up with with something of your own and not somebody else's work. That is what a true artist is. Until then, The joke is on you.

  • Iris O'Connor says:

    Richard Prince is nothing but a common thief with absolutely no original thought or piece of work of his own.

  • Alex N says:

    I'll be the people complaining like Mr. Brainwash

  • Kevin Bartelme says:

    Richard Prince is just so perfect. Stupid, talentless, completely corrupt, an exemplar, in these troubled times, to us all!!.

  • Tom Gilbertson says:

    Wow!  A lot of hostility here.  After more than 50 years of making and teaching art I really admire someone like Prince who has managed to stay tuned into a childlike curiosity and freshness.  I wish I had had the nerve to buy a book, sign it, then call it my own… wow (again.)  And I'm jealous that I didn't think of taking one of my de Kooning books and just working into it.  Rauschenberg erased a drawing of de Kooning in the early 50s…. now Prince has done something similar.  Poor Bill….. every body  is picking on him, still!!

  • Peter Hackett says:

    Someone broke into his gallery and didn't steal anything…that speaks volumes.

  • E. Lew says:

    Sad, but he was smart enough to be the lamb of slaughter on a very huge modern issue. He knew every bit of what he was doing. Social media is social to the bone. Anyone can use our stuff. Now everyone knows it. It is Historical B.S. but he opened those eyes and his name is on it forever. That makes the prices on what he did rise to extreme heights. He truly cares nothing for anyone. He does what he wants with no thought of anything only what he wants to see. The art of what he did is art at it's very dirty act. It really sucks, but it is truth. If it were not then the items would not have sold and the Gallery that sold them would not have done so. Infamous is still golden in the rules of the land.

  • Nicholas Rizzuto says:

    "The idea of buying a book and calling it yours is something you have to give yourself permission to do." I just consulted an attorney, and apparently that's an inaccurate statement.

  • Katstroke says:

    Fuck this guy!

  • darcy paterson says:

    Why is he any more of a thief than Picasso who "thieved" from African art? Or Warhol who "thieved" from graphic designers? Or Renaissance artists like Raphael who "thieved" from the Greeks?

  • Thomas Hemmerick says:

    this almost seems like a joke. he seems like a weird character from an x-files episode

  • Daniel Carter says:

    This guy sure is flat and boring.

  • george seirsdale says:

    This man is fueled by the ability to create. Maybe some of you can appreciate that instead of judging his awkwardness.

  • fudgepellet says:

    yet another "Artist"who has nothing to say. Neither does his Art

  • Nicholas Ruddoffskki says:

    he has a soothing voice

  • William Grob says:

    what a joke

  • ajaxfilms says:

    They broke into his house/gallery and didn't take anything…the work wasn't worth stealing.

  • Barbara Botanica says:

    he looks depressive……i am a happy artist

  • AJ Y says:

    prosaic, really.

  • Nicolas Caron says:

    This man is boring, he doesn't have any personality, no aim, he's just playing around and gets millions of dollars to do so, I will never understand why he has become so famous

  • vutEwa says:

    I would call this artist a loser but then there is the factor that he's rich. But he's rich by being a loser. How do you like that? He's not really that skilled. Trial and error. That's not skill. He could take three or four of his lifetimes and never reach the halfway mark of Rembrandt, for example. He seems depressed. I hope he commits suicide!

  • Darth Mindbender says:

    Art often depends on the artist's ability the justify it's legitimacy. Technical ability is not needed, as long as the artist is sufficient in the art of bullshit. Using the language of art to explain why it should be appreciated. If two identical works sit side-by-side, success will go to the artist better defending it's concept.

  • mossy1 says:

    So many squeaky wheels in the comment section. Richard Prince seems like a good guy. Especially compared to all the low-life narcissists in the comment section who, at the risk of sounding cliche, are clearly just jealous of his success. He definitely deserves success more than these loser assholes below.

  • Kae Pugna says:

    better than jackson pollocks garbage

  • Supertomiman says:

    Are you people fucking retarded? What the actual fuck? That is some of the most grotesque and ugly work I have ever seen in my life. I can not even begin to fathom what kind of psychopath would be capable of such horrendous drawings. It looks like what the kids in juvie would draw. The only paintings that looked decent were the nurse ones, and he stole those, so yeah…

  • Arthur Mcgonnell says:

    Corporate art fraudster working for the Wall St Mafia no doubt laundering dodgy money for crap soul less art…even the burglars didn't take any of it..they had taste!

  • Sammy smith says:

    For some reason I read the comments first then tried to watch the video.
    I had to stop after a minute and a half.
    i couldn't stop laughing.

  • The Big F U says:

    So he copies other artist. He is a thief that copies copies copies…SHAME

  • Joseph Charles Colin - The NEW FACE of Art says:

    & my art Takes 5 sec & I sell $77 X Views & In my art you are looking @ the wrong Place.

  • Dan Duffy says:

    Personally, I love how he allows himself to create whatever he feels. Too many artists try to stay the same. Really though, artists can do whstever the hell they want. The problem isn't him drawing over Dekooning pages, it's that people buy them. Other than that, I do enjoy his more abstract stuff

  • Instagram: AWrestlingHistorian says:

    Steals people's pictures then got rich by selling them. What a piece of shit!

  • MKULTRA3 says:

    From Wikipedia: "The Wall Street Journal later reported that Prince's parents worked for the Office of Strategic Services in the Panama Canal before he was born." OSS = CIA.
    Another boring psy op.

  • Vinay Seth says:

    Degenerate man-child.

  • Carlos Carrillo says:

    He gives himself permission to steal, a real thief from the heart.. Can't hate on that.. Everyone is so bitter. You wish you could do the same .

  • Mohamed Ali says:

    He stinks !

  • Hendry yyy says:

    Harry ptter.. lord of the rings.. narnia.. game of thrones are mine.. cos.. ive wrote it again and change the characters name..

  • KandaPanda says:

    …..Kinda has a serial killer vibe to me.

  • 00:42 says:

    Tell Us About The Ice Storms Richard !

  • Joseph Böhme says:

    Not the eye of the beholder; the buyer of the art. The exhibitor, be it a museum, corporation, public/private venue, they all wish to promote and gain favor. Anything that is made, anything…. can and does occupy space and has a value. A napkin worth 7 cents, and a line of script maybe  6 linear inches by less then 3/32" can be worth millions if it is the work or signature of a famed person.  Gaga's trash could be sold, if she wanted to make it so. So if you can trade on what you cause to happen and circumvent the laws properly, you may be entitled to live a better life and own a farm and build more stuff.  Does a video pornographer- 'artist' deserve to make more than the woman actress…… possibly, it does not matter, we all can do as we wish or claim insult, and offenses against our ethic codes. We will die either in comfort, or in pain. So shall we live, in comfort or in pain- Hard to occupy both dimensions. I'd have been a bit jealous of Picasso in his era, no cold lonely nights for him.

  • Benz Boy says:

    I never really cared how the public perceived my work, I could care less – Richard Prince

  • John Stark says:

    What’s being seen is how hard it is to leave one type of space and quickly join a conversation in another It’s not boring in the least. How dare you. I do not love most of this stuff but recognize what is happening. He is thinking.

  • Divine Fye says:

    Images of white women overly sexualized and objectified, how original.

  • Amy Sifuentes says:

    Wow this is awesome

  • Steward Delgado says:


  • known_unknown says:

    Modern art has been at least as much about ideas as aesthetic qualities since Duchamp. For me personally, I find both the ideas and the aesthetic features of Prince's work a lot more enjoyable and interesting than an arch creep/maniac like Koons. As far as him seeming "weird," I mean, compared to what? Lil Xan? He's a grown man, very wealthy, spends all of his time in physical environments that's he's created. I don't think he cares about fitting into modern and fleeting ideas of how you're supposed to live your life or behave in a fashion that would be considered "cool," which I think is the very essence of actually being cool.

  • Troy Wu says:

    dude went full dustin vernon

  • perditachavez says:

    his whole career is so boring, anything means anything, but i like his bank account tho <3

  • Kat Kristar says:

    At first, I thought the cluster flies on that wood floor at 10:38 might be part of his "art". (ahhaha~Why not?)

  • AZ says:

    Informative to see the ghost of a man who hides behind such a slick hypercapitalist façade. Helps make plain the utter disconnect between the ambivalence behind the culture his work represents and the level of consciousness needed in the world today

  • Mark Wardel says:

    He comes across as almost like a Hollywood actor playing the part of the jaded, successful artist/ genius….I think it's pretty cool…performance art and his 'art' is merely the props in his performance.

  • Jean-Marc Ropiteau says:

    guegenheim cool-Aids

  • Cliff DaRiff says:

    This is great!

  • Joe Rodriguez says:

    Richard price is a bore

  • ULATAN says:

    So basically by this guy's logic – you are able to buy a movie on DVD. Once you buy it, it's yours to reproduce and distribute just because you give yourself permission.

  • AeroDynamic says:

    b o r I n g .

  • Tsunami 33 says:

    Boring as f

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *