Better Late?

Written by Sally Apfelbaum

Painting: Love Zone, Avenue B, Sally Apfelbaum, 2021

The Guardian published an article by Sam Smiles in 2014 titled, “Artists over 50: better late than ever?” In it, Smiles wrote about three exhibitions that featured late works by Rembrandt, Turner, and Matisse, also mentioning a Malevich show at the Tate at that time. Smiles wrote:

“So-called "late work" is often the most radical and the most mysterious art of its time, quite at odds with contemporary voices, and we have come to relish it for just this intransigence and non-conformity.

Yet the idea that late works are especially significant would have astonished our forebears. Less than 200 years ago, late-life creativity was almost a contradiction in terms. The traditional view was of a three-stage development from apprenticeship to mastery and then to creative decline – if the artist managed to survive into old age.”

Has that idea, that aging doesn’t necessarily signal artistic decline, actually taken hold?

The population as a whole is living longer. For artists, that means many are working longer, and possibly, making their most important work. Are artists 50 years and older are thinking about the next few decades - where they’ll be, how they’ll live and work? Additionally, what the circumstances that enable artists to continue their work as they age; and why there are so few resources for them at this time.

Artists often have unconventional financial and employment histories which render them ineligible for mortgages, Social Security, and affordable housing. Frequently, they struggle to maintain living and studio space, to archive and safely store their work. As they age, there are fewer job, grant, and professional opportunities; their incomes decline, as health issues increase.

In addition to already unpredictable lives, older artists face caring for aging family members and partners, and are vulnerable to crises like the current pandemic, with its disporportionate effects on the health of older people, and broad economic impacts. It’s astonishing to me that there are so few resources and options for older professional artists in the United States, with their strong record of contributions to the culture and economy.

The 65+ age group is the fastest growing age group; 10,000 people a day turn 65. Everyone is affected by aging. How is it that there aren’t innovative, appealing, not absurdly expensive options for older people in this country, and, for artists: live/work ‘art residences’, with exhibition, teaching and mentoring opportunities, art-making facilities, storage, archives? The only designated live/work space for older artists that I know of is at Westbeth in New York City - which became such by default. The wait list is closed; they accept fewer than 4 new residents a year.

Actors have the Actors Fund, a national organization providing emergency financial assistance, affordable housing, healthcare, insurance counseling, senior care, etc. Artists have a patchwork of services, and a total of two arts grants specifically for older artists. It’s kind of like you’re not supposed to talk about these things, have everything together at 60, and supposed to deal with aging privately.

Are new and better approaches, options, places, resources, organizations possible? They seem overdue to me.