Another look at the Art Market

[LCR]

This is - quite well-known French art historian, art A. Puatvena, where it was published - I can not say I was given photocopies of the text.

Gradually, the case definition of the artistic value of works of art, previously performed by the academic jury, took over the market.
   
The relationship between the artistic value and the value of the product will remain problematic, but now it seems that the market - the most adequate authority to determine the value, even when it comes to art.
   

Читать дальше... 

It is interesting to try to understand whether the art of a victim of this mutation or is in some degree lies in its basis. It is also interesting to see whether the market can recognize these artists. This question involves issues of taste, subjective by definition. We can say that those who seek the power of imagination in art and technical excellence to be told that the market has ruined the art, but those who are interested in art above all radically new map of the world, say that the market is practically infallible tool in assessing the artistic value.
   
Price is determined by the market based on a comparison of supply and demand. It should be borne in mind that the main characteristic of the art market (there are four markets: the market "gift of art", the market experts, the speculative market, and the corner market) - is that it is driven by demand. Therefore, we must first understand what constitutes art for individuals or organizations, was the origin of this demand, and only then proceed to the consideration of social and economic demands made by the artist to the current system of valuation and commercialization of art.


I. In place of the corporation and the Academy came to the market
   
Painting has been the subject of buying and selling with the appearance of easel painting in the XIV century. Historically, the creation and movement of works of art governed by a professional corporation, were by the Academy, in turn replaced by the market.
   
1. From the XIV to the middle of XVII century

In 1391 the corporation has the exclusive privilege of the artists in the arts. Only the master has the right to paint and sell them. Over time, royalty free distributes or sells more patents, which undermine the prerogatives of the corporation. The doctrine of humanism, which had at first walking in the narrow circle of artists of the Medici court in Florence will soon spread, and showed an archaism corporations seeking to strictly limit the scope of competence of the artist.
   
2. From Colbert to Napoleon III

In 1648 founded the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture, which the jury decides questions:

• hours in school;
• awards (medals at the Salon d'Automne);
• co-optation of new members from among the awardees and artists;
• distribution of official orders.

This fully hierarchical structure. The artist can not exist outside the Academy. In 1786 the French provinces, there are 33 of the Academy. In 1816, the Royal Academy was renamed the Academy of Fine Arts.
   
But by 1860 the Academy of credibility is undermined by the Romantic artists. In 1957, Delacroix became a member of the jury of the Academy, but he failed to prevent Ingres from 1825 to 1867. fostered their academic manner. However, the academic system can not afford to provide either education or way of existence of a new generation of artists, which is becoming more and more.
   
Thus, in 1963, allowing the Salon Les Miserables and reforming school enrollment of Fine Arts, which significantly infringed on the privileges of the Jury, Napoleon III was just a little hurried steady development.
   
3. Markets have run Impressionists

The most important actors in the world of art became art critics and dealers.
   
The first critical article was published in 1738 in the newspaper "Mercury» (Le Mercure). Diderot was the first art critic in France. Subsequently, Baudelaire and Zola, influenced the development of the taste of buyers.
   
The first was an influential art dealer Paul Durand-Ruel (1831-1922). Involved in the beginning of its activities Barbizon school, he became the chief advocate of the Impressionists. He bought the vast majority of their work from time to time he had to go into debt, but in the end he earned this status, tirelessly working for the glory of their "chicks" - he based art magazines, organizing exhibitions in London, Rotterdam, The Boston ...
   
Renoir and Monet continued to send their work to the Salon to raise the quotation of their works. However, in 1880 they received from the Durand-Ruelle equivalent salary director of central administration. Pissarro and Sisley were not as clever business people, but they receive about the same annual fee.
   
In speculating on the origins of art items hundred I t Impressionists. Indeed, their paintings shocked only a handful of very wealthy Parisian bourgeoisie, the regulars Salons and purchasers of gold paintings, which quickly lose their value. Thus, it soon became clear that much more profitable to buy Impressionist paintings, the demand and therefore prices are rapidly rising.
   
Ambroise Vollar (1865-1939) and especially J.-H. Kanvayler (1884) were the largest traffickers cubist painting. Kanvayler systematized the use of exclusive contracts. He pandered to the transformation of the art market in a monopolistic structure in which the entrepreneur is not afraid to risk a free hand. Indeed, if the entrepreneur has concentrated in the hands of the artist's entire output, he can organize a commercial operation, designed for the long term, going contrary to the prevailing tastes.
   
Since 1914 quotation of works of living artists gradually caught up with the prices of works of famous masters of classical painting. Collectors were buying in the hope of getting one of the most important paintings by the artist, who can become Vermeer tomorrow. We must bear in mind that only the works of contemporary artists can bring huge profits - the classic works of art have long been considered, masterpieces stored in museums. Accordingly, the demand of speculators is almost exclusively aimed at a modern painting. Thus, by 1918 the antagonism between art and the economy does not exist, from artists, critics and speculators common goal - to understand what is important today, and that will be important tomorrow.

The new social mission of art is to reveal the new. The main purpose of the artist - no longer attachment point (the value of imagination), not the image of reality (the value of skill), and even the sincerity of (a romantic value). It should produce something new.

Never art was not so connected with the economy, as in the modern era. In periods of euphoria before the onset of the crisis has always been the rise in prices. For merchants and artists economic crisis is a disaster. Private collections go from hand to hand. In the case of high inflation, works of art can act as a "refuge", but only if it works by recognized masters.

Fiscal policy plays a role in the price of art. Thus, in the U.S. transfer of works of art donated to museums be deducted from taxable income. But the art is connected with the economy even more radically - the economy has become the only authority that legitimizes art.


II The current situation
   
Today instance, determining the value of artistic work, is no longer a church, not the Academy, not a bourgeois audience. All of these categories dissolved in society. The hypothesis we formulate is the fact that the artist listens to his age, adjusting to the fact that this era is now values most - speed, multiplicity and consensus. Conclusion: the artist recognizes the market rather than any organization or ideology.
   
But what market? Before analyzing the pricing mechanism, encouraging customers and pressure system, it is necessary to characterize the modern art scene.
   
1. What are the actors for a scene?
   
The significance - and, accordingly, quotation of the artist - a network of influential intellectual, governmental, economic and artistic circles of the country. The international significance of American, German and, to a lesser extent, of French art to a large extent due to organization and power of this network.
   
Indeed, intellectuals need to recognize and protect the innovations introduced by the artist - after all, if beauty can be understood by everyone, the understanding innovation in the plastic arts often requires special preparation of the viewer.

It should also state the existence of institutions that can "legitimize" the importance of artists (eg, Pompidou Center, who organized the exhibition Garusta in 1989, when he was unknown, the Museum of Modern Art in New York, putting Frank Stella, when the latter was 23 years old ).

The significance of the financial community creates trust speculators and easier to find capital for investment. However, this element is fundamental - for example, the Japanese are buying only the most famous paintings, they raise prices, but most likely will not get a large profit. They can not afford to protect national artists, as they do not have a network of art dealers, galleries, museum workers and experienced collectors, which would allow them to become autonomous and, for example, to protect the artist, displaced by the new trend in art.

Thus, the art market is controlled by five major categories of participants: artists, dealers, critics and museum professionals, collectors, the public. Depending on the balance of power between these categories, we are dealing with one of four different art market:

• market "gift of art"
• market of art lovers,
• the speculative market
• a prestigious market.

2. Pricing
   
When a phenomenally high prices for certain works of art at public auction with the public the impression that between the artistic quality of the picture and its value there is no connection. This feeling is largely due to the belief that the cost of the product is determined by the work that it took to create it (a picture can paint a child!).

The first classical economists and Marxists have argued that the value of labor is the major determining the value of the product, but modern economic theory almost completely abandoned the concept. Neoclassical economists insist on the dichotomy of "benefit - a rarity" The price is formed on the basis of collision between supply and demand in the art of painting. The concept of "pattern" is also not unique, it varies depending on whether we are dealing with the market "gift of art", the market of art lovers, speculative or prestige market. However, the choice of one of the four markets for a particular pattern solves the demand, respectively, it also determines the price, as prices in each market completely different.

   
The first two markets "benefit" for the buyer is the fundamental criterion for the two remaining major is "rare" (again, for the buyer). Once the buyer has identified the product that meets the criteria of his choice, he paid an artist fee in the amount determined by this artist. If both parties agree to assess the value of the product, the transaction is immediately, otherwise, the parties traded ...

3. Four market

a) Market "gift of art»

This painting sold on the streets in some neighborhoods of the city, supermarkets, and in certain galleries. Ask them the wish to decorate the interior decoration standardized (hunting scene - for petty Living, nude female figures, flowers ...). All these pictures are easily interchangeable. Typically, the artist receives a reward depending on the surface of the painting, sometimes with the addition, taking into account his reputation.

b) The market of art lovers

In this market there are some experts, major collectors, museum staff and some of the dealers in art. Their demand - no decoration, and art. The concept of "art" is not so easy to understand and explain. Necessary to distinguish the demand, which buys (real demand), on demand, which is content to consider (potential demand). It seems plausible that the "real demand" affects the proposal and thus manipulates the "potential demand." You can continue this logic, concluding that in museums and on public tenders, we see "psevdohudozhnikov" and "psevdotsennosti. This hypothesis is not art of um discard too quickly, because the public (museum) and private (collectors) demand pursuing the same goal: to find the object is not subjectively beautiful, and have the greatest potential to increase value. However, museums are more and more frequented, so they are forced to enlist the support of intellectuals, which in turn seek recognition from the public. Thus, if the manipulation is possible on a short period, for a long time exhibited works of art will be recognized by the majority. Therefore, the role of critics and museum curators, who formerly have been subjected to severe criticism in recent years increases. They do not have much money, but it is impossible without their participation to be recognized artist. Themselves as critics and curators, in turn, will be recognized only if their choices are increasingly valued, that is, quote their chosen artists strictly increasing. So the market of art lovers, too speculative.
   
in) The speculative market
   
Assembly of such collectors as Giuseppe Panza, Charles Saatchi and Peter Ludwig larger than many state museums. They bought dozens of paintings by the artist, who they like. They act as the major art dealers beginning of the twentieth century. Sometimes they pass purchased their works to museums as a gift or give them to temporary exhibitions. All this raises the quotation of these artists. The driving considerations collector may be:

• the prestige of ownership, helping to penetrate the most elite sectors of society;
• the consciousness of influence on the art market and art;
• the speculative excitement: when prices rise at the artist - is proof of taste collector, who was able to recognize it earlier than others.

Getting benefits is not necessarily a strong motive, this is just a consequence of speculative excitement.
   
r) The market prestige
   
In the speculative market value of the picture for several years may increase to 10 or even 100 times (Stella, Johns, Rauschenberg). But with some of the price threshold should already talking about the market of prestige. Only rare art dealers have the opportunity to support these artists. Almost always, public auctions are the best way to sell the most significant works of famous artists.
   
Painting or sculpture is different from the shares of any company quoted on the stock exchange, so that it does not pay dividends. Therefore, to acquire the investment attractiveness, it should be a source of profit. If you calculate the cost of insurance, protection products and interest rates, it turns out that simply in order to recoup costs, the picture of Van Gogh, purchased 5 years ago, need to sell twice as much. Market prestige - not a speculative market. Until recently, he served for the purchase of "investment-havens", he now serves as a theater for advertising operations.
   
4. Artists, subordinated to marketing
   
Since the days of Edgar Allan Poe is known that "art - a 5%genius and 95%of labor. Now, better to say that it is 5%genius, 5%Labor and 90%marketing.
   
The artist's work can be quantified - depending on the size of the surface of his paintings to the time that it took you to master the skill (the arguments presented Whistler in the early twentieth century in the trial against the customer who feels that an artist needs for his work too much money). Famous artist is also a selling point.
   
The current system requires immediate recognition of the artist. The artist must say something new, and that innovation must be immediately shown, since it makes no sense to argue that the artist's paintings were a decade ago when they create innovative. Therefore, the artist requires a curator, so that he had made for his lightning-fast recognition to participate in the artistic life and write his name in the history of art. Owners of galleries and dealers act as an impresario of young artists. They organize exhibitions and advertising. In the end, history does not know so many great artists who died in poverty - Rembrandt, Hals, Van Gogh, Modigliani - the most famous of them. They initiated a romantic legend of the "curse", unrecognized artist. Our era, which loves winners, likely to react scornfully to the artist, have not been able to achieve recognition. However, Article of um too much to worry about its modernity, as an artist, too soon recognized by major museums, risking too fast and go in the wake of the market, instead of looking their own way.

[AlexanderG]

Moia dissertatsia byla posviaschena rynku iskusstv, tsenoreguliatsii inasyvalas': 'Selling a dream', igra slov: dream - mechta, son.

Interesnye raboty, kotorye ia ispol'soval dlia tesisa - Willie Bongard - matematik, kotoryi vpervye pokasal zavisimost 'tsen ot kolichestva vystavok, publikatsii itd.
Chudesnaia kniga peter Watson, 'From Manet to Manhattan'. Ona daiot podrobnoe opisanie mnogih mehanismov, v tom chisle auktsionnuiu deiatel'nost '.

[AlexanderG]

Hotelos 'by eschio k etomu dobavit': kogo my sobstvenno rassmatrivaem, kak hudoznika?

Predlagaiu - hudoznik (painter, fine artist) proizvodit 2D kartiny na traditsionnoi osnove (holst, bumaga, stena, panel '- MDF, fanera, derevo), nanosia na etu osnovu pigment (natural'nyi ili iskusstvennyi), rastvoritel' /baza znacheniia ne imeiut.

Davaite obsudim, a to seichas hudoznikami (artists not painters) nazyvaiut vseh ot povarov do .....
A galerei i podavno (esli ne schitat 'arhitekturu), a nazyvat' galereiu mesto gde prodaiutsia /vystavliaiutsia predmety iskusstva.

Kartina - predmet iskusstva.
Skul'ptura - predmet iskusstva, no ne iavliaetsia Fine Art.

Kstati, kak luchshe traktovat 'etot termin?

I voobsche, davaite o terminologii pogovorim.

[irena]

please please if you know where this article was published. I need to use it, but I do not know how to formalize the source.

[Marta]

Сообщение от AlexanderG

Kartina - predmet iskusstva.
Skul'ptura - predmet iskusstva, no ne iavliaetsia Fine Art.

Kstati, kak luchshe traktovat 'etot termin?

I do not know whether you can write in this topic? Alexander G and other professionals make, please clarify the term Fine Art. We have many perceive it as something indecent, unseemly (like the word salon). I have just recently asked in the SC, and where the exhibition format Fine Art, or what sort of annual Salon. I received an evasive answer and make suggestions, but judging by her facial expression it was clear that we aim for higher flights - Grunwald 600 years "- is the theme. A format Fine Art brings to the "Kalyadny Fest": there were trees, and dances, and artists scrape (oh, surprise!). In general, I would like to understand.
If not in theme, then remove the administrator, please, no offense.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Marta

Fine Art

I always thought that it was "fine art".
What do you mean Salon?
For example, GMII im. Pushkin called in English as: The Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts.

[Seriy]

Yes, just art. The subtle art. Because in English means both Art and skill.

[Pavel]

Сообщение от Marta

I do not know whether you can write in this topic? Alexander G and other professionals make, please clarify the term Fine Art. We have many perceive it as something indecent, unseemly (like the word salon). I have just recently asked in the SC, and where the exhibition format Fine Art, or what sort of annual Salon. I received an evasive answer and make suggestions, but judging by her facial expression it was clear that we aim for higher flights - Grunwald 600 years "- is the theme. A format Fine Art brings to the "Kalyadny Fest": there were trees, and dances, and artists scrape (oh, surprise!). In general, I would like to understand.
If not in theme, then remove the administrator, please, no offense.

Try. Beauty is competition vsefrantsuzsky in Paris. In doimpressionisticheskie times was the personification of academic and ostentation, so salon art is synonymous with the ceremonial psevdodorogogo. Now the Paris Autumn Salon is an international competition rightfully podrozhaniya because they open up new names.
Fine Art is just a Fine Art.

[Marta]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

I always thought that it was "fine art".

Thank you. I also like this thought, but faced with the opinion that this is a commercial art - in a negative sense. That is, customized to the tastes of the mass consumer, but masterful.
Still, until the end and do not know. Suppose Shulzhenko, about which you are clearly written, such as the language does not turn attributed to Fine Art. But, it turns out - can I? Or is it somewhere in between.

Сообщение от Pavel

Fine Art is just a Fine Art.

Paul, is a masterpiece. Go all clear.

[Seriy]

Marta, there is no color, it is a term common and neutral.