. said:

It looks to me that she always operated under debt from day one back in the late sixties. She probably financed her first camera and photography school or whatever with debt and just kept running a slough of accounts since then. A lot of people live this way. She was able to cobble a whole life together this way, until the economy started to tank and the bills started coming due. And really what value do her works have? I mean in 25 years who will care about the Rolling Stones going on tour in 1972? Her works will always have some value but their overall valuation could be poised to tumble with the baby boomers slowly fading from the national stage...