Prices for contemporary art

[LCR]

I make the transfer an editorial in the Web magazine «Who's who in international art».

http://www.whoswhoart.com/joomla/ind...&Itemid=37

The price of today's art

Among the issues that continually ask the public about contemporary art, dominated by one: how to calculate the price of the product iskkusstva?

Читать дальше... 

This issue is often expressed surprise and skepticism of the public (and sometimes - and artists, gallery owners and historians) in the form of very high prices for works of modern art difficult to understand: how can one explain, for example, that a completely monochrome painting (even if it is created famous Yves Klein) or the mountain of stones (the work of Richard Long) st of um so expensive, and generally something st of IT?

Let's try to answer but not immediately, but gradually.


«This is - the devil knows what»

Modern Art, which experts are counting from the beginning 60-ies. last century, consists of works that are strikingly different from each other. At the same time, it often gives the impression of incredible inferiority of execution - to such an extent that some imagine that "it can make any", including a child.
Even for Picasso once said: "This is - the devil knows what!" Writer Andre Malraux told the journalist Jacques Chancel, he said of Picasso, one of the participants in the French Resistance, is not familiar with modern art: "This type of - this wizard: I, too, can "create" such works, but he manages to sell them for a fortune! "Contemporary art and black magic - both phenomena captivate ...

This story clearly shows how difficult it is to explain the pricing of the product of the 20 th and 21 th centuries. But why this issue is still so has our contemporaries?


What is left of the criteria of the past?

Visitor halls of the Art 16 th, 17 th or 18 th century in the Louvre (confine ourselves to these centuries, and this museum) feels that the financial value of works by Rembrandt, Nicolas Poussin, Francois Boucher meets art, as well as superiority, as well as the specificity Each of these artists are quite obvious. No need to be art historian to appreciate the skill of the Creator, who by chance are called "masters» ( «maître» - in French "lord, master, owner, master"). Recall that they possessed a wide erudition, incomparable to the level of a simple craftsman, necessary for the creation of works on mythological, religious or historical subjects.
 
It may be that some would think that these works are still too expensive, but no one will dispute the validity of their prices based on the perfection of their execution. In addition, we are talking about the artists of the past, and historians have long identified the location of each of them in a number of their contemporaries and to subsequent generations of craftsmen.

Thus, the first sign that can justify the cost of works of art (in the eyes of an inexperienced or unconvinced audience) - a the apparent perfection of execution, which means simply "I so can not do that!" .

But is that enough? We'll have to admit that no, as early as the Renaissance artist is increasingly different from the artisan. One skill is not enough.

Should also take it into account something new that the artist brings to the art. For example, Rembrandt and Poussin were contemporaries, and mastery of both can not be doubted, but each of them left their own mapping of his era, that is, they are not equivalent.

Similarly, no one can deny evidence of excellent performance skills Gerhard Dow, but it is difficult to imagine that it can put over a Vermeer. The hierarchy of these artists in the history of art has already been established, though not so long ago, and, consequently, and prices vary - with a difference that is hard to disagree.

On the other hand, have always been artists who have enjoyed more than others. Some of them became fashionable, the other spectators were carried away less, and some do not get carried away. This phenomenon can also be a justification for the difference in price for their product, and evaluation of their art historians in this case is irrelevant. However, we need to take into account the fact that when an artist goes out of fashion, his quote is reduced and reflects his true place in the history of art. Sometimes, this former "fashion artist" completely disappears without leaving any trace the history of art.

The fate of the most famous artists of the 19 th century is well known - already in the next century they were completely forgotten. For example, William Bouguereau (in life - this monument, uvesheshivaemy inundated with all sorts of awards and gold up to and me his death in 1905), Alexandre Cabanel, Leon Gerome and others . - were surrounded by fame, like Jeff Koons, Maurizio Kattelanu and Daniel Hirst today.
 
Since then nothing has changed - just look through the catalogs of art fairs in the past 30 years to find the names of the most hyped at the time, but have forgotten - and not always fairly - artists.


The criteria for judgments, beginning with the 20 th century

The cost of Marcel Duchamp's urinal, filled not by the artist himself, in fact, signed the name of a wholesale manufacturer of plumbing Myutta was invaluable - despite the fact that the original of this work, created in 1917, has long been lost. This is very strange, but nevertheless this is the case (it came to that, when the artist Pierre Pinonchelli deliberately broke one of the replicas made Duchamp, buy a new batch urinals in 1964 in limited quantities, its estimated 3 million euros) .

Must be said that abstract art is also a source of confusion as the public and among artists. Like Impressionism, Cubism, Fauvism ... But all of these artists, innovators could quickly convince the world of art on its side ( "The legend that the artists of the late 19 th century lived in terrible poverty, and incomprehension among his contemporaries, is completely untrue," - writes art historian Christine meslin in his book The Mirage of Modern Art. "She recalls the social origin of most of the Impressionists, including Van Gogh, and the rapid increase in the prices of their products). Of course, these are very significant artistic movement initially evoked a strong reaction of rejection, because they broke with tradition. But soon they fit into the history of art, because the gap is much less radical than it first seems - in the end they too were engaged in painting and sculpture ...

However, Duchamp, until the beginning of the second half of the 20 th century, better known in the U.S. than in Europe, the situation is quite different. This is not a rupture, a revolution. This is - a complete abandonment of the past, from history, from the traditions of craftsmanship, relayed for many centuries from one generation to another, and the development of a new world, a world of modernity, the world of science and progress. This - the development of a new art history. Denial that had important consequences for hudozhestvennoogo training in the late 20 th century. (The historian Jacques Tyuile wrote: "One of the characteristics of this period was the sudden abandonment of traditional techniques. Of course, the architects are continuing to teach construction skills, and, frankly, it is difficult to imagine that they could ever hope to do without it. But in other areas of the arts traditions, continuously transmitted from the Carolingian era, the last 30 years simply disappeared. Today the sculptor can not mold a knee or arm. The artist can not draw a shoulder or torso. Almost all higher education institutions that are no longer taught. amazing speed with which this occurred process. This situation has spread to Japan, and China, where only a small part of the artists follows the traditions, all the rest imitate the western model ").

The fact is that, while Marcel Duchamp had lived in the 20 th century, one could argue that in fact his age /time starts in 60-ies. Simultaneously with a new history of art, which he opened the door.

What is this new art? In the end - the creation of concepts applicable to the visual arts to the development of new materials (video, performance, photography, installation, digital art, etc.), transformed into visual art.

If people are legitimizing the taste of time (critics, museum professionals, gallery owners) are taking the concept of the artist, despite the fact that the material realization of this concept can be quite mediocre (actually, often the artist does not take in the implementation of any part - as in Jeff Koons Fabrice Ibert U.S. or in France), the price of the product will reflect the novelty of this concept in relation to other developed since Duchamp.
This means that the person issuing the official label of modernity in art, valid for both the world of formal organizations associated with art, and for the art market, judging artists and sculptors, along with installers, photographers, Video Producer, using conceptual filter .

In this situation, interest is not mastery of the artist - though it may be noted that Duchamp and his followers, a new skill - not a culture attracts the attention of the artist and his knowledge of the history of painting, from cave painting Lascaux. The subject of evaluation is its ability to "portray the idea", to illustrate the concept, using any means of expression - any foundation, size, type and scope of the material, etc. This may be the viewers themselves, or the value for the spectators of a gesture or a sign, especially if the meaning of work for the artist is to provoke - but this tool can be a tube of paint or jute canvas.

From this perspective, it does not matter, it is figurative or abstract painting, she left the world the image to enter the world of pure concept, it is subject to the same concept, under which - and only on this basis - it is estimated.

The idea of the artist to replace the traditional skills and created a new skill that consists entirely in their ability to make your artistic choices that viewers must decipher (the entire history of art of the 20 th century, consists of declarations, manifestos, concepts and ideological struggle - see the anthology edited. Charles Harrison and Paul Wood's Art in theory. 1900-1990 ", which shows the creative force, but sometimes naive, causing only confusion, artists of this time). This explains the confusion of many of our contemporaries, who continue to look at the painting of our time, as if they regarded the paintings of 18 th century, or to perceive the installation Nam June Paik, as if it were a sculpture by Rodin.

Considering the "Thinker", do not need the instructions for use, even if the viewer can not catch everything that Roden is in his sculpture. Here, the viewer - an erudite or unsophisticated audience - is dealing with embodied reality, which can be felt. But can we say the same thing at the sight of existing televisions and radios, harmoniously arranged Nam June Paik, who called his work "Voltaire? We need to understand a lack of understanding audience and, consequently, the need to explain to those who are not satisfied with the opportunity to respond to this job ridicule or treat it with indifference - and already understood, the audience may laugh, if amused by his explanation.


Based on the foregoing, it is necessary to conclude that there are two categories of works and, accordingly, the artists who must be distinguished from each other: those who remained faithful to the history of art from the Lascaux paintings (as Balthus and Bacon), and those who fit into the new art history leading the beginning of Duchamp. Of course, this division is sketchy, but this distinction is indeed crucial for the so-called modern art.


The market assessment is the predominant

To understand how to calculate the price of the art of our days, need to put a work of art in "his" context . But it's not all. What else?

Next, you need to take into account an assessment of experts - we have already said, but will return to it again, because it is ultimately lets hang out or that the price of a certain piece of art. And because it is a trading price, the first experts are gallery owners.

These "most important traders" are always present and on the "historical" art fairs (Art Basel in Basel and Miami, Fiac in Paris, Art Köln in Cologne, Arco in Madrid), and their young rival (Frieze in London, Armory Show in New York, Art Bruxelles in Brussels, Art Forum Berlin, Artissima in Turin). All of these fairs are fighting for maximum clarity and readability of the international market, which should attract the most influential buyers, including representatives of government organizations, purchasing works of art (there are fair, not oriented to the market, the laws which they consider to be absurd - this is Europ'ART in Geneva, which represents brokers and artists in a different way, and, more importantly, representing the other brokers and artists - which is becoming the most influential alternative fair in Europe).

If the views of those dominant professionals agree with the opinion of critics and representatives of the official art world, quotation of the artist will be gradually adopted at public sales. For the artist will closely watch the major collectors, such as Francois Pinault in France, as well as collectors, dealers, such as Charles Saatchi in London, the real creator of flavors, whose choice of artists does not leave anyone indifferent, and only dealers art should be for every his gesture.

Thus, prices for works of a small part of rising artists, and sometimes literally take off the market, while the other artists on it completely absent. These artists are trying to find themselves without the aid of an enlightened public opinion of the market. But what about the price of their work? Based on what criteria they evaluate their work?


Price of independence

Artists who have decided to retain independence from the market or have found a place for the reasons described above, themselves determine prices for their work.

Without any claim to the universality of our model, there are several data, in our opinion, fundamental.

First of all, any experience of the artist has a price: the price of the work of young artists, irrespective of whether he graduated from university or art institution is self-taught, there will always be lower than on the artist's works with the B of have greater experience. The buyer should also take into account the number and especially the quality of exhibitions in which the artist participated. Matter and received an artist award, even if he does not have a quoted market price, but should be excluded awards for which the artist had to pay - unfortunately, this situation still occurs.

We're going against the spirit of the times, and advise the buyer to be attentive to the execution of the proposed works. In addition, we must compare them with the works of this kind, traded in the market, and with the works of the past, been featured in art history. That is why the opportunity to become acquainted with the artist and talk with him very useful - it helps to understand his creative process and evaluate its contribution to the art.

Some brokers, realizing how difficult it is both public and independent artists to build on the art market information to determine prices for works of art that have developed tools to assist in the classification of works of art not covered in the market. But no one can guarantee you the validity of the asking price, as in the arts are all very subjective, so "normal" price is the one that agrees to pay the buyer.

[Admin]

LCR, an excellent article, explains a lot. Thank you very much!

[fross]

Very interesting article. But I'm still not very clear which mechanism is achieved multimillion-dollar prices for contemporary works. It's like something very similar to the principle of financial pyramids.

[Meister]

fross, and they have )))))))) not always of course, but very often)))

Сообщение от LCR

artists of the late 19 th century lived in terrible poverty, and incomprehension among his contemporaries, it is not true

here do not agree, most of the "first name" Impressionists lived very very modestly. but about those who were at the top, and flush with cash, now hear very little.

[LCR]

Сообщение от Meister

most of the "first name" Impressionists lived very very modestly. but about those who were at the top, and flush with cash, now hear very little.

I do not know, in general, I doubt I'll go today, buy this book meslin (she was very critical of contemporary art dyushanovskogo direction and has initiated a petition against the exhibition Fabre at the Louvre) and in principle could translate it for the forum are just not clear what is to be with copyright: confused:

[Admin]

LCR, I think the whole book need not be translated, you can give some excerpts from his own comments, then the problems with copyright will not be.

[Ninni]

Article really interesting but unfortunately very superficial - questions remain at the same level -

[Maikl]

as reflected in the price, finding the artist's works in national museums

[AlexanderG]

Сообщение от Maikl

as reflected in the price, finding the artist's works in national museums

 Ochen 'polozitel'no

Added after 4 minutes

Сообщение от fross

A very interesting article. But I'm still not very clear which mechanism is achieved multimillion-dollar prices for contemporary works. It's like something very similar to the principle of financial pyramids.

1.Eto stalo vozmoznym s sozdaniem razvitoi sistemy kreditovaniia.
2. Sistema uhoda ot nalogov toze vkliuchena.
3. Samye serioznye sdelki prohodiat za kulisami i obychno publike ne izvestny.
4. Eti liudi znaiut, kak zaschitit 'svoi kapital, na veter takie den'gi ne brosaiut.

[voloviks]

Сообщение от fross

Very interesting article. But I'm still not very clear mechanism which achieved multi-million dollar prices for contemporary works. It's like something very similar to the principle of financial pyramids.

"Behold in the root." More like - the more expensive it will cost you.