Uninformed, glamour-struck, get-rich-quick artists-turned- gallery owners subscribing to unethical trade practices, however, can. "Uninformed owners purvey kitsch because its pretty. Because it sells. Good taste, discrimination, rigour, a sense of history is missing," says Ebrahim Alkazi, director, Art Heritage. That apart, many owners have been known to sell works at prices above those specified by the painter, then pocket the difference as well as the commission. Some are loath to spend money on invites or brochures for exhibitions, others insist on painters sharing costs. "It's their job. We pay commissions for this so why shouldn't they?" fumes an upcoming painter. Badly curated exhibitions of substandard work, a trader's attitude to art is what many painters ascribe to uninformed ownership. "I've seen decorators walk into the Dhoomimal gallery," reveals a disgusted painter "and say ' kucch blue or beige mein dikhaiye ' and attendants showing them canvases like retailers in a cloth shop. This breed of gallery owner is all too common". Vadehra being one example of trader-turned-gallery owner. "A painter as a bachelor in fine arts should only make as much as his non-artist bachelor of arts contemporary: Rs 10,000 a month," he states blandly. "A painter with a masters in fine arts is the equivalent of a business management graduate. Why should he expect to make more than Rs 1.5 lakh a year?" Not gallery owners alone: painters assisting them as 'advisers' are also the bane of fellow painters. These painter 'consultants' are often plain self aggrandising salesmen eager to promote themselves or their cronies. "Half the city's galleries have painters manipulating the proceedings: pushing themselves, sidelining the competition," asserts Desai. As proof of such practices, Khakhar cites the instance of 'adviser' Husain 'advising' Chemould Gallery, Bombay, to remove his work from the display.