“Imagine painting. But you’re 200 yards away from the canvas, and 80 people are holding the brush. And you’re on a walkie-talkie going, ‘Need a little blue there. No darker blue. No DARKER BLUE!’”
— David Fincher’s definition of directing.
I'd have a very difficult time dealing with assistants in the studio, if my work warranted it. It just wouldn't be the same having someone else work on my paintings, I have to be in there otherwise there's no point in bothering to continue to paint . Following the experience through to the end is what makes art work for me. If I haven't worked on a piece all the way through from start to finish, then I'd have a hard time calling it mine and putting out into the world as such.
There have been and continue to be plenty of painters who avail themselves of studio assistants just to be able to get their work completed. Kehinde Wiley and Marilyn Minter come to mind as two contemporary painters who use studio assistants to help finish their works. I'm not a purist about it because I know that photography, printmaking, sculpture, and installation work all have some sort of collaborative aspect built into the practice. I just feel that if I'm not going through every step of the process of making a painting myself, I'm missing something. The experience is that much less for me and I feel that there begins to be a disconnect between myself and the work. I'd have a difficult time with the kind of distance that comes with having others painting parts of or entire paintings for me.
I suppose that if I were given a commission that required a time limit and enough money, I'd have to hire someone to do some tasks that I might not be able to get done while painting, like stretching canvas and maybe mixing paints, but that's about it. I wouldn't be interested in letting someone else actually paint for me.














