Where are you right now?
I'm at my farm right now, several hours from New York. I'm just sitting in the library, looking at a beautiful sky. It's so blue, and the trees are all green, and the river's just right. I'm very lucky, and I'm feeling very good about it.
This exhibit is free, so what do you get out of it?
Well, if we sell any prints, we get a percentage, so that's how we've been supporting it. Primarily, though, I get to showcase John's work.
John was an artist before he became a rocker... he was an artist first. During his life, he was trying gallery shows and wasn't very successful. As you know, Scotland yard confiscated his art, and he never became a really popular artist, but he was always trying. I felt after his passing, it was my responsibility to present John's work - not all his work, but some of his special works, and one of the things I had in mind was that his drawings should come out in the right way.
But it was difficult to get around to doing it. In 1985, I set up the program, and it's been touring around the last ten years.
Why did John not use color in his drawings, and why have you decided to add color?
When we made the program, the professionals we hired said the audience would really like some color stuff. They said it was very necessary to bring out the program with a bang. They colored one and showed it to me, and I said, 'If you have to do that, let me do it.' I colored them to please the people who set up the program, but the way I colored them, I think, worked. I didn't want the color to be something that would ruin the drawings, and did it very lightly.
I didn't even think of coloring it in, and certainly wouldn't have thought of it on my own. Initially, I thought it was almost sacrilegious, but I see what they're saying... I never would thought of it that way before John - I was a very puritanical artist. But through being with John, and after his experience with the music industry and everything - if they say it's good for promotion and that I should color it, I'll try it out.
How did John make the art, what was the process?
John didn't spend a lot of time doing his art. He was an inspired artist. Just like he made his songs - he could be inspired and would just make the song very quickly, and that's how he was with his drawings as well. He only drew when he was inspired, and he drew very quickly.
That's because he was so talented. Good art is not a matter of time, but results from how inspired you are. I don't think the drawings would have been better if John had labored on them for years. His artwork is as good as his records, and has value, and we [Bag One Gallery] have to establish the value of John's work.
Did you work with John on his art?
Of course not, I didn't work with him on drawings. John had a distinct style before I met him, and I had no influence over him. I'm an artist myself, and you can't tell artists what to do. I might have encouraged him by admiring the work he did, but he encouraged me in my work. Even when he started to experiment with oriental brush drawings, that wasn't me - he just wanted to do it.
A lot of people I mentioned this to said, "Oh, she's just doing it for money," or, that you're, "just sucking the marrow from a dead man's bones." How do you respond to these comments?
I'm sorry they feel that way. I don't think everyone is cynical in that way, and it's great that the show's going on in Anchorage. When I visited Anchorage in the '70s, I had a beautiful feeling about the place - it had a real unspoiled feeling. John's work is brilliant, and I want a lot of people to see it. If you don't like it, you don't have to come.
We're not really doing it for money. Would people think we're 'just making money' by selling records? With artwork, it happens. If Bag One Gallery makes money, I don't think that's bad. The promotion and expense of Bag One gallery almost offsets that which comes in, so right now we're really not making a profit. John's work is in a lot of galleries, but I've tried to keep the prices low, so it's accessible to more people.