I have been a fan of the band KISS for many years. I have seen
three concerts over the years. As such I was very anxious to attend
this particular exhibit.

Having viewed some of the works on the internet beforehand I was excited
to see them in person. The possibility of meeting Paul Stanley was also
something that attracted my attention.
After attending the exhibit however I found myself in somewhat of a
quandary. I have a policy to give only good reviews. I abhor those
self righteous critics that live by the philosophy that "If it bleeds,
It leads". Generally if it is not good enough for a good review, then
it is not worth my time to write a review about it. In this particular
case I was forced to go against that rule. Since I had actively
participated in informing my viewers of the Paul Stanley exhibit, and
had done my very best to encourage my viewers to attend, I felt duty
bound to come clean about my true opinion of the exhibit as a whole. I
would encourage Mr. Stanley to take comfort in the positive aspects I
outline while gaining perspective from any negative.
My initial feel for Mr. Stanley's work was good. I particularly like
his self portrait done in acrylics. I would have much preferred this
work to be done in oil, but I do understand the reason why some
artists like acrylic media. In person, this work is every bit as
impressive as it was on the net. What I did find disturbing however
was the price. This piece as an original was priced at $45,000.00. I
am a firm believer that something is only worth what someone is
willing to pay for it. Therefore it could be said that if someone was
willing to pay 45k for this painting, then the painting is worth
$45,000. However it can also be said that "a fool and his money are
soon parted". I do not believe that a respectable gallery would ask
such as price for this painting were it not for the fact that its
originator were extremely famous. If Mr. Stanley were famous for his
work as a painter instead of his work in the music industry, I would
not have this complaint. But seeing as how he is asking prices
comparable with world renown painters who have been plying their craft
for decades, it gives me extreme pause.

To
illustrate this point we can look at a few artists that have achieved
national renown. Michael Godard who has become famous for his black
backgrounds and martini swilling, animated olives has produced and
sold art to such a degree that he is now the worlds best selling
artist. Original works can range in price from $30,000 to $100,000.
Piano Martini, viewed to our left in original form sells for under
$40,000. It should be noted that at that price, it is still a good
investment as Michael Godard's recognition as a world famous painter
will increase its value over the years and will not suffer any decline
in price.
The artist Geoffrey Johnson is another fine example.

His
sepia masterpieces are as unique as the works of Goddard and are every
bit as impressive. Sometimes the images he plies to canvas can be
haunting in their detail while some of his works can speak volumes
with their simplicity of form. A truly masterful painter. Pictured
to the right is his wall sized painting "Triceratops". Last time I
saw this painting it was selling as an original for a mere $16,000.
It is hard to say that one painting is more important than another or
has more impact to the art world than one by another artist. But I do
give more prestige and value to works by a career artist than I do to
a relative newcomer who trades in fame for a fast track to success.

My
final example is one of my all time favorite modern day artists. The
incomparable Carrie Graber. One of the finest artists to ever exhibit
in New York, Carrie Graber has certainly paid her dues. Her paintings
are legion. Her depictions both provocative and sublime. One of the
most thought provoking works I have ever viewed by a modern day artist
was her A Glass of Red, pictured to the left. Two years ago, at an
auction held by Park West Gallery this incredible original sold for a
mere $7,200.00. And I cried for not having it.
My best advice for Mr. Stanley is to trade upon his artistic talent
more, and less on his fame. I do think there is potential in his works
that would hint at a future degree of notoriety as an artist if only
it is not overshadowed by his fame as a rock star.