Some glimpses:

Norman Bluhm, although present in the offering of numerous galleries at the moment, possessing a Bluhm is always a thrill and why not this one. Detail (24×19.75 in):

Alexander Liberman, An interesting work by someone most known for his sculptures. A bargain for this quality. Detail from Red Tangents (11×11 in):

Robert Motherwell, Collage monotype. Detail (26×19.75 in):

Click on the image to be transferred to Artnet

Because the commercial value of a work became the primary way of evaluating its value, work became good because it was expensive rather than expensive because it was deemed to be good.

Such astonishing naïve comments are thus given in this late month of March 2009 by an exercising art fair director and former auction-house specialist, and this in the solid framework of a Newsweek article on the current art market situation.

Not only is this ‘revelation’ a pure banality; it’s fundamentally false in its assumption that in ‘normal’ circumstances good work is paid more than bad work – as in these sober times when the artificially created buying frenzy has exhausted itself. The commercial value of art has always been and will always be manipulated. If not artificially pushed, art does not sell well, whatever its qualities. The exceptional Hirst and Yves Saint-Laurent sales were both brought to the limit in this respect and the results were comparable, regardless of all quality criteria and notwithstanding the absence or presence of a recession.

Any plain screenprint by Warhol will sell at a higher price than a Velasquez oil painting if the controlling market forces want it to. You can collect monetary value or you can collect art. If you are in fact collecting money, the amount of art that you’ll get with your purchases is always relative. In this respect it’s extremely instructive to browse through the catalogue of any major artist’s life’s work. Without exception, only a fraction of the whole is worth our appreciation. The rest should be looked upon as exercises, failures, studies, and preparations. The overwhelming majority of the pieces on the market by Van Gogh, Manet, Monet etc. any average mediocre artist could have executed, in fact so badly accomplished are they. It’s the comparatively small output of masterpieces that make great artists stand out. And these pieces museum curators have long acquired. Commercially, however, the story is quite another. Commercial success is a question of marketing, and marketing is make-believe. And collectors of monetary value, in great difference to collectors of art, are abundantly present and for the most part conveniently stupid or, why not, clever, all depends on how you look at it.

Fine Art Auctions puts it this way:

The value of a work of art is determined by various factors. In rare cases, new testing methods or publications can lead to scientific insights that could not even have been anticipated at the time of purchase – in the worst case, the work is worth less than was thought. One of the most famous cases of a fall in value is probably Rembrandt’s ‘Man in a Gold Helmet’, which in 1986 was attributed to one of his students.

Fine-art-auctions.com is exemplary when it comes to reassuring the potential customer. Of course, if you don’t have the accumulated weight of Christie’s, you need to be reassuring and fine-art-auctions goes more than just out of its way to alleviate any unease:

Only reputable auctioneers and art galleries may qualify as partners of Fine Art Auctions. The basic requirement is for them to have been working on the fine art market for at least 10 years. If this preliminary condition is met, Art Directory Service GmbH meticulously checks the applicant’s references, its qualifications and other issues, for instance whether it is a member of an auctioneers’ association. Specific criteria have to be met for acceptance.

So what’s the result of all this effort? Well, a particularly agreeable site with much dynamic and perhaps the best platform available today for finding quality art at normal market prices. Don’t yet hope to find major works but expect drawings, prints, photography and the odd oil by some minor name. The present sobriety will undoubtedly change in the future as we get more and more used to the virtual platform.

Evening sale 4 February:

Lot 9 Edouard Vuillard (1868-1940) Les couturières, oil on canvas, estimate £4,500,000 – £6,500,000

(detail)

Lot 10 Amedeo Modigliani (1884-1920) Les deux filles oil on canvas, estimate £3,500,000 – £5,500,000
(detail)

Lot 15 Pierre Bonnard (1867-1947) Pot bleu oil on canvas, estimate £500,000 – £800,000
(detail)

Lot 18 Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec (1864-1901) L’abandon (Les deux amies) oil on board, estimate £5,000,000 – £7,000,000
(detail)

Lot 24 Paul Gauguin (1848-1903) Clovis oil on canvas, estimate £550,000 – £850,000
(detail)

Lot 41 Joan Miró (1893-1983) Femme entendant chanter le coq aux éclats violets oil on canvas , estimate £500,000 – £700,000
(detail)

Lot 42 Paul Delvaux (1897-1994) Jeux de mains, oil on panel, estimate £400,000 – £600,000
(detail)

Lot 46 Francis Picabia (1879-1953) Les acrobates (Gymnastique banale), oil, gouache, watercolour and pencil on board laid down on panel, estimate £400,000 – £600,000
(detail)

Let’s once again remember what we were taught about the market being cyclic and that sense is only made on the longer term. There is absolutely no way to predict what will happen in the months to come and those depending on the art market for their living will have to use all their cunning to survive in a climate where price volatility and uncertainty rule.

Remember, the burst of the latest bubble was essentially about contemporary art and about living artists, having never before attained such monetary results. It was also about people knowing very little about art being lured into buying products of smart marketing. The array of new galleries that followed suit, the shoals of private dealers riding the currant, are now quickly dwindling away; also because of the impertinent habit of a new breed of artists to dispense of their services.

In times of uncertainty people turn to traditional values. It’s normal and healthy. Classicism will keep on being the rock on which to lean, and classicism takes us today already well into the mid-20th century. Let’s say that there are two generations needed to establish a work’s stature. Contemporary creation may be more interesting, rewarding, fun or whatever, but in terms of value it can’t be but ephemeral or conjectural. The art market investor, who is not a speculator, knows where to put his savings.

And this is the final line. Investing in art is in normal circumstances not more, nor less rewarding than investing in stocks, bonds or commodities. It is part of a healthy approach to diversification and as such helps to attenuate risk. And of course it’s much nicer to spend your time enjoying your art than following indices… Speculation, on the other hand, is common to all monetary instruments, with inevitable rises and falls in fortune.

It’s clear that the financial depression eclipsed the contemporary art boom and that the latter’s demise is affecting the art market in general. But if the disease is endemic to the affected patient, the collateral contagion is but temporary. Old masters, impressionists, modern masters etc. will quickly go clear.

So for 2009, this is my bet: vested values will suffer little, contemporary creation will be shunned. This till the end of the cycle…

After the disorderly panic that ensued after the spectacular fall of the economy – the latter in more than one sense fictional and rather worthy that of the house of Usher – we have come far towards sobering up over art’s true value. Sadly, the only winner seems to be Damien Hirst, having conned the world at the ultimate moment.

Now, as a speculative fool having let yourself go in the cunningly orchestrated folly, what do you do now with your silly stuffed shark? Well, according to the Economist:

Edward Dolman, Christie’s chief executive told The Economist on December 18th. “We’ve seen confidence dwindle away. People are not certain where prices are. Buyers all round are being very circumspect.” Death, divorce and debt will continue to provide artworks for the auction market. But discretionary sellers, who don’t have to sell, are likely to want to sit it out until things improve. “We’re not predicting much discretionary selling at all next year,” Mr Dolman said.

Well, the incredibly brainless Hirst collectors are in for a long wait if they want to sit it out!

It is with great pleasure that one sees crap once again treated as crap and Hirst’s creations losing appeal. He will go down in history though, for all that incredible money that so astutely changed pockets for so little return … In my opinion, in a couple of years Hirst’s art will value two times zero.

If you bought something by Hirst, sell as quickly as you can ;)

Ebay Live fed confusion because it had no policy on quality. On the one hand it was a supplementary sales channel for traditional auction houses having goods consigned in brick-and-mortar sales rooms (among those some very respectable ones); and as such it was an altogether interesting alternative to the telephone bidding facility; on the other hand eBay Live featured auctions by auctioneers who were not only but engaged in virtual trading but who moreover didn’t have any of the goods auctioned in consignment or under control, but who simply let unscreened paying members propose their ware through their channel at their own responsibility. There were examples where just anyone worldwide paying their fee could act as a seller. Evidently this didn’t create the climate necessary for serene transactions.

Ebay Live also had an exasperating interface that couldn’t bring up any real auction life excitement (see previous post). However, at this moment, with the notable exception of Christie’s Live, no other actor on the market seems capable of bringing an alternative or improved live-auction platform forward. There’s lots of talk but very little substance emerging.

As for traditional sales room support it seems that Artfact Live is taking up the challenge of providing a supplementary Internet sales channel to reputable auction houses. And for pure Internet auctions with fixed end time, Artnet Online Auctions recently launched their platform. As for eBay, by pulling out of the live activity and by introducing more severe rules, there is evident improvement in regard to their core activity.

The general trend is set for more security. We may be confident that Internet will find ways to affirm and develop its ever growing market presence.

It is true that this new medium threatens the classical (and often costly) intermediaries, who are not always as professional or useful as they make us believe. Nonetheless, the brochure, albeit already a bit dated, is interesting. But as with everything in regard to Internet we need to accustom to virtual reality and not try to bend the world to our own will. You either accept the evolution or you are surpassed. It is clear that in the niche of Affordable Art, direct trading on the Internet between knowledgeable actors is already gaining market share and prices up to 5000 USD are readily paid. The on-line experience just asks for normal due diligence. If you are careless you will be ripped off whatever the channel.

Here are some excerpts from the AADA’s online brochure:

The Internet is a remarkably user-friendly way to navigate the art world. The World Wide Web can be used to do background research on an artist or type of art that interests you, to locate dealers specializing in that work, to scout available inventory and to check prices. The Web offers access to art and galleries all over the world. Email makes it easy to initiate a relationship with a gallery that you might not readily be able to visit.

However, no one polices the Web for accuracy, and the Internet must be approached with intelligence and a degree of caution. Art-historical information is only as good as the source from which it comes. Internet sellers may post images of works they do not actually have access to, or that are incorrectly described or not authentic. Prices need to be understood within the larger context of the art market.

While the Internet can be helpful in researching an acquisition, the actual process of buying art should not differ substantially from any other kind of art purchase. Unlike books or appliances, most art works are unique, and unless you are buying a low-cost multiple, you will not want to simply pop the item into your online “shopping cart” and proceed to “checkout.” After you have located a work or artist that interests you, call or email the dealer. Ask questions about provenance. Does the dealer perhaps have other works by the same artist that might interest you more? Get a description of the condition and a good photograph, and be sure that the dealer is reliable and reputable.

So far, attempts to sell higher-priced unique art through online auctions have not proved very successful. The risks attendant to buying on unvetted websites such as eBay are simply too great. EBay and similar sites essentially act as neutral conduits between buyers and sellers, who are solely responsible for delivering on their promises. Services such as Paypal, which withhold payment from the seller until the item has been satisfactorily received by the buyer, cannot wholly guard against disappointment or fraud.

Recently, some of the larger art auction houses have initiated online bidding services, which enable bidders to participate in real-time auctions from their laptops. Essentially, the process is no different from bidding on the phone, as the actual sale is still conducted in the auction house’s salesroom.

Since Internet sellers are liable for the authenticity of the works sold and for conveying good title, buyers must ultimately rely on the honesty and knowledge of the individual seller.

The present dynamism of artnet is further shown in their interesting cooperation with Art Basel – Miami Beach.

As for artnet’s online auctions, that seem to have great difficulty to take off, we’ll be back with an in-depth analysis.

This is no small advance seen that the present financial crisis teaches us that no investment is safe and that investing in art at least benefits from a non-pecuniary gratifying dimension quite absent in stock.

A market is essentially about exchange. This suits the art collector because exchange is essential to his occupation. Work is acquired and work is passed on all along his learning path. The collector’s choice oscillates between affective and financial value and the collector’s character and purse will decide on the itinerary to be followed.

A recession has two mutually annulling effects on the market. 1. The offer becomes abundant because no one wants to buy. 2. The offer becomes scarce because no one wants to sell. Booming economic times have just the opposite effects. The result is, believe it or not, a pretty constant equilibrium in offer and demand, only pricing changes according to conjuncture!

It’s on the brink of recession that money is made. When notwithstanding an abundant offer everyone still wants to buy. Hirst timed it all so well, what can you do except admiring a natural business genius?

A recession is buying-time. And buying is by far the most pleasurable activity!

Lindström 1925-2008, ‘Groteskt ansikte’ Bukowskis, Stockholm 15-16 Dec 2009, starting USD 2,500