Nov. 2012

What makes modern art?  How does it sale?

Modern art can be described as not so much as a hard definition, but yet more of a time frame.  Most art historians will include modern art from 1860s to today, some even earlier the late 1700s, yet it is somewhere around the time that Courbet and his Anti French Salon movement, Manet and his bridge from Realism to Impressionism to Monet and the Impressionists that set up the time frame for Modern art.

Who does one describe Modern Art though? is it just work that is created recently? In the past 100 years? A time frame cannot really put it in perspective as in in Music, songs and bands from the 70s are known as Classic and those from the 50s and 40s are known as Oldies and music from the time that the impressionist time period, yes that music that is hardly listened to outside of a few of us (I am one of them) is known only as Classical. This is seen as old and not “modern”. So why is it that other pieces of art work from that time period are known and called Modern? Literature is also one that falls to this as not “modern” as one can look at the works of Emile Zola and feel a transportation back to a world of the past.

It can be argued that to be Modern, work has to be avant-garde or works that is in the forefront, is innovatory, which introduces and explores new forms. That can truely be said for the work of Courbet as he broke away from the teachings of the 1800s French Salon and can be considered the great-grandfather of Modern Art. However, with the loose brush works of Manet that helped bridge the way for Monet and the Impressionists that really broke away from the what had been done before, making their work Modern.

Yet, why are artist like Jeff Koons, who is still in practice and working today, selling works for the same amount of money as what Monet, Warhol and other great artists from the past are selling their works for while artist like Justin Bua and Brian Ewing, whos work is just as impressive, doesn’t sell for as nearly as well as what Koons does?  Is it the style of art? If that might be the case, then Koons himself should not be as famous as what he is.  he has been doing the same work for the past almost 30 years and his time should be coming close to an end, but his works keep becoming evermore popular.

Sure, there has been some publicity of Modern Art, large galleries like MoMA and the Tate Modern and smaller galleries like Crewest in Los Angeles show extensive collections of what is considered New and Modern.  Yet the question still remains on why is one artist sold for so much more than another?  The question is not about quality of work. The pieces that the three above named artist create are fantastic in their own right (Yes even Koons, even though he doesn’t actually do any of his own work), yet the divide is still there for them.  Is the fact that Koons work is more relatable to the general public than what Bua and Ewing’s work is? Is that the reason why in art history classes, more emphasis is placed on people like Andy Warhol instead of Richard Hamilton, Edward Kienholz or even Chris Burden, Joseph Beuys or Marina Abramović.  

Now sure, Burden, Beuys and Abramović are preformance artist, but there are images that one could purchaces of their works that a partron of the arts could keep and hang just like any other works of art.  In fact I know a couple of people who do. So for this up coming year, I would look for those works, works by artist who are not as big as the Jeff Koons in modern art, but those who are on the verge of making it big, such as Justin Bua (even though OvationTV and Bua have done several projects together), Brian Ewing, David LaChapelle or support preformance art or images from a preformance that have helped make these artist known today.  This is where the term investment comes in because one can purchase these works for cheap and sit on them where I predict that one day they will bring you a nice return.

August 2012

Okay, so it has been a little while since I went thought and posted a new article. It has been the off season for sales and so I went through compiled a list things I wanted to write about and this was the top of my list, especially since it is about to start with a new Art Auction season.

With this upcoming auction season, I know that there will be some things that go up for sale that are going to bring some very high dollar figures and some that won’t. As someone who writes about what happens in the art auction world, I would like to give my list of what to look for and what to avoid this next year as you might be looking to purchase works.

First, I would seriously avoid things that were mass produced. This goes without saying that the things that were mass produced will not be worth as much, now and for the long term. Sure you may find the rare mass produced item that the vast majority of produced objects could have been lost or destroyed over time, like a Dürer print (which I would buy an earlier work of his over a later work, but if I were to buy or recommend to by a later work, then make sure it is an earlier series of that work or print) but I would highly suggest to stay away from things like Picasso’s later works. There are SO many of them out there that were mass produced during his lifetime that there is really no value to the work, the only thing that you would be paying for is his signature…and sometimes that is even nothing more than a rubber stamp. If you were to do a work by him, buy something from his early years of cubism or from his rose or blue periods.

I would also stay away from a lot of modern contemporary works. Unless you know for a fact that the artist just received a life changing award or commission to creat some piece, the returns on the work are way too risky. There is no promise that there is financial return on the work and the chances of the work staying stagnate in value or maybe worse, actually decreasing in value are highly possible. True, you could be the luckiest person in the world on a gamble and buy a piece at dirt sale prices and the artist blows up, but the chances of that are not very high. If you are buying a work just because you like the artistic beauty of it though, that is a completely different story, just make sure that the art work is real and not a copy or a fake and this can be dome by knowing the history of the work.

However, if you, as a buyer, would like to do some smart investing, I would suggest to go with artists that you know or may have heard of before, maybe something from the 1800s or early 1900s, and find something that is rather one of a kind or something that is of a limited edition (especially for prints or photographs). For artists from the 1800s, try and find the sketches they had done of their more famous works, things that show their idea process unfolding. These are becoming more and more rare as time passes as more and more of them are being lost, accidentally destroyed or are falling into collections. Sometimes, with a little research, you can even make a connection between just a sketch that they might have gotten for a low price and then connect it to a master piece.

I would suggest to lean this year towards sketches and lesser known works by famous artists, which sounds like it would either be a no brainer or an insane idea, but it would depend on how you look at it. If one would take the example of the hand written notes by Leonardo Da Vinci. They, today, are priceless. However, Many years ago, they weren’t seen as nearly as valuable as what they are today. Now of course they are not worth as much as let’s say the Mona Lisa, but they are still worth so much more than anyone would or could have ever dreamed. I can see that the sketches and notes by Manet and other impressionists all the way through Dada artist like Max Ernst to pop icons like Richard Hamilton and Andy Warhol someday reaching prices that would make any investor or his/her future family very happy.

July 2012

To continue on what was said in my last article, I’m not at all surprised that Koon’s work went for the very low end of his estimated price, but am still a little shocked that it even got that high.  Yes, it is a very beautiful work, but still, way over priced for an artist who doesn’t even do his own work.

However, let us talk about another artist that we have recently talked about.  This artist was born in New York on August 15, 1950. He has spent his time trying to find what some call the most vulgar side of religion and to expose it to the masses. Photographer Andres Serrano will have three of his works go up for sale on July 16th at Rockefeller Center in New York City.  The three pieces that he has going up for sale are nothing like the work Piss Christ that has been mentioned in the article before this, but never the less they are works of artist who has his own taste.  The first work that I will talk about is titled Cabeza de Vaca. The best way to describe this work is a cow’s head on a little stand.  The cow’s head looks back behind him as trying to find out if his body could actually be there or not.  The work can be seen as grotesque being a severed head of an animal that was once living, but really…it isn’t really that much different than anything hanging on a sportsman’s wall.

Andres Serrano’s “Cabeza de Vaca”

The next two pieces I’d like to talk about are pretty much like this on in there really isn’t much with them at all.  The Morgue and Budapest are really nothing special.  The Morgue doesn’t have the shock and aw value that Piss Christ had and Budapest is really nothing more than just a portrait.  Both are valued at $8,000 – $12,000 which I think is way over priced.  I know I have said this before, but this price is strictly for the name and not for the piece.  I know that Mr. Serrano is still alive and if anyone he knows read this, I’m not sorry for what I am saying here.  You know how to take a photograph, but really what are the subject matters of?  What separates your images from mine?  Oh yeah…you were a one hit wonder who’s one image was damaged beyond repair by a museum goer…so now what? It’s been 20+ years…please come through with something else or noteworthy so we can talk about and that will get you back on the map.

Andres Serrano’s “The Morgue”

Andres Serrano’s “Budapest”

Now, outside of Serrano and two pieces by Andy Warhol that are included in this sale, there is one other notable artist, at least notable on my list, which is German born Joseph Beuys. Mr. Beuys was known for his performance really, for his works like How to Explain Pictures to a Dead Hare and I Like America and America Likes Me.  This piece of work though, Food or Thought, isn’t like any of his other pieces of work.  This is printed work, or as Christie’s has described it “Printed Paper and Butter”.  This is really nothing more than what looks like a food list for the local college football team before the big game.  This piece, like Serrano’s work, isn’t worth anything. Christie’s has it valued at $4,000-$6,000, and I can promise you this price is for nothing more than the name of the artist.  The only reason why Serrano’s work is worth more than Beuys’ work is because, and I am just guessing here I really don’t know why, Serrano is more recent than Beuys, that is it.  Beuys is well more known than Serrano, that is for sure, but really, this is more for public display than worth some private collector spending a couple of thousand of a piece that will not increase in value at all.

If someone wants to buy this work, then by all means do it, it is your own cash, but I would suggest to stay away from these four pieces unless you plan on donating it, because that will be the best thing you can do for it.

Joseph Beuys’ “Food for Thought

And like I said, there are two Warhol’s in this sale…they are no where close to his best work nor close to his most notable.  Buy it for the name of the artist and nothing more as the $6,000-$8,000 price tag would be reasonable for that, based on the fact that it is Andy Warhol’s work.

For more information on these pieces and the others that will be on sale during Christie’s Open House auction that will take place on July 16th at Rockefeller Plaza in New York City, please visit the link.

June 2012

In a couple of days, Christie’s auction house is auctioning off a very controversial artist. Now I’m not talking about controversial like Andres Serrano and his work Piss Christ. However, in my mind, in similar and different ways this artist is just as controversial. Though, first I am going to show an image of Piss Christ for those of you who are unaware of what the image actually is.  I am not showing this image offend or to upset, but purely as a reference point since I named the work and I am comparing it to another work an artists.

“Piss Christ” by Andre Serrano c. 1987

Now the artist I am referring to is none other that Jeff Koons. I know some of you are scratching your head or calling me a quack here because how an you compare Koons and Serrano together as controversial? Well in my mind it is rather easy.  Serrano is controversial in this subject manner while Koons is controversial on if he even created the art work himself, and if he didn’t, then how can he put his own name on a piece of work that was created that he didn’t touch?

The work that Christie’s is auctioning off is this seven foot tall sculpture that was executed between the years of 1994-2008 for an estimated auction price between $3.9M to $5.46M, which is outrageous.  Now, don’t get me wrong the work is beautiful, as I will show you here in a second, but it is the way the work is done that makes me the most upset.

“Baroque Egg with Bow (Blue/Turquoise)” by Jeff Koons c. 1994-2008

This piece is one of five versions, each are uniquely coloured and look beautiful.  However, my question is, who really created this work?  Sure, it is known that Mr. Koons had the idea of the work and most likely drew up the design of it. However, after the design stage of this work, how much more physical effort did Mr. Koons put into this piece? Did he actually ever lay a single hand on it during it’s actual physical creation? Did he help out with the sculpture or the painting of it?  Or did he just give a nod if he liked the way it was looking or suggest who it could look different or better in his eyes if he didn’t like it?  Who really knows what happens behind the closed doors of his “studio”?

The reason why people would disagree with me on this topic of Koons is a good argument.  They will ask how does Koons differ than the works of Andy Warhol and his Factory?  Andy mass created works of art while he used the people in his studio to do the work, and like what I consider Koons, most people would also consider Andy Warhol more of an art director than an artist in his later years.  This is true to an extent, however the thing that is Andy Warhol made it known who worked in his Factory and who could have or did contribute to the works of art that came out of there.  Anyone can do a quick internet search or get a book about the Factory from his or her local book store to see the names of those who were involved there, people like Edie Sedgwick, Ingrid Superstar, Nico, The Velvet Underground, Candy Darling, Ultra Violet, Mick Jagger, Jim Morris and many others.  There are names of music gods listed above, and their contribution to works can be questionable or if they even contributed at all to any works, but at least we have a list of names who could have worked on a production, and the movies that Warhol did, we already know who was involved with that.

However, with Koons, who knows who has done what to his work.  I personally do not know of a list of people who has worked on pieces and/or which pieces.  Sure Koons’ “studio” would have a list of employees that they have paid, but more faceless or unknown people are out of there than a Wall Street Bank.  Thinking about it now actually, I don’t know anyone who has been, currently is, or knows anyone who has been involved in Koons’ studio.  Now that doesn’t necessarily mean anything as I don’t know every artist in the world, but it is hard to find any documentation of a single person who has had any involvement in the studio.  I have seen a documentary from I believe was on the network Ovation TV that was in regards to Koons’ studio, and it showed a couple of people working on pieces, but I couldn’t tell you who they were from the average person on the streets in ABC City.

Warhol was protesting the whole mass production of material goods and what was becoming “art”, the consumer need. Koons on the other hand is doing what? I don’t know…maybe going through and having these people create the work so he no longer has to get his hands dirty while collecting most of the profits and all of the fame from the pieces?  That sounds like something a big corporation would do, not an artist, someone who is more interested in filling his/her pockets with the most money available instead of actually working for his supper, putting in a honest days work for an honest days pay.  Sure he can get some credit by designing the piece, but still…does he deserve the title of Artist? There are major factors that separate Warhol and Koons, who both are having work auctioned off by Christie’s on June 27th in London, England.

For more info on these pieces and to see the other beautiful works on sale in this auction, please visit Christie’s Website.

UPDATE:

I have been contacted by Lisa Berg from Ovation TV who informed me that they will actually be showing a documentary on Mr. Koons tonight.  For more information on this documentary, please check out the this link.

May 2012

In the month of June, there will be several good auctions.  Sotheby’s will have a Fine Books and Manuscripts auction that will be happening on June 15th in New York City to their Impressionist and Modern Art action happening on June 20th in London.  This will be an interesting sale that I will look forward to.  I am not going to lie and say I know a lot about Fine Books and Manuscripts.  I LOVE to read, and I know which books that I would consider a good book and which ones I would not…like right now I’m reading Emile Zola’s Nana, which I’ve just started reading, and I know a few things to look for in a book to see if it is at least considered an okay or good book…but until further notice, I will say that I know nothing in regards to having the ability to say what a book is worth and what it is not.

Yet another sale that Sotherby’s will be doing on Wednesday, June 20th in London will be their Impressionist and Modern Art Day Sale (34-35 New Bond Street London W1A 2AA) at 10:30am and 2:30pm. This sale includes work by Jean Arp (from 1960 to ’65) and surrealist Joan Miro (later works, 1970, 1978 and others) to Henri Matisse, Max Ernst and Salvador Dali.

The one constant in the works that Sotheby’s is auctioning off is that the works are by the artist in their later life, not when they were in their prime.  These works seem to be, for the most part (excluding works like Dali’s La Maison Surrealiste c. 1949) as the artist are on their way out or right before they pass. Yes, there is a market for these works, a grim look on life, seeing an artist’s last grasp at something that they were at one point in time renowned for, however when Joan Miro, a surrealist (which had their day from the mid 1920s (some say as early as 1922 with ManRay others when the first Surrealist Manifesto of either 1924 and yet others in the year 1929, that is why I say the Mid 1920s), having his work from 1970 (the work I’m referring to is Tete [Sale Lot #116] which was executed on the 31st of March, 1970), almost 50 years since the Surrealist movement had had it’s day and only 13 years before Miro died, can be appealing to some people, to own the last bit of history of an artist.

However, I remember watching a documentary, I don’t know if it was from the Tate Modern or had a retired curator from the Tate that stated even Andy Warhol, who most consider one of two of the greatest artist of the 20th century, if not the greatest, as well as one of the five artist that changed art forever, couldn’t get an exhibition in the last years of his life, that actually when Warhol passed on, the Tate had been taking steps and scheduled an exhibition of his work, his first one in over five years (and if I am wrong on this, either way far off or if there was another exhibition that came closer to his death than this one that was in the works, please let me know and comment) or longer as he had been all but forgotten about outside of the work that he had done in the late 1950s to the early 1960s.

That is the way that it happens with art.  As the artist grow older and their work no longer fits into the world around it (as Miro’s work Tete was done in the Pop Art era, when screen printing and BenDay Dots were all of the rave), the work can be seen as the artist doing what he/she loves the most, which is art for art’s sake.  For the most part, their work is not being sold for what it was (Example that Tete has an estimated value of $243,000-324,000 and Salvador Dali’s Deesse De La Pluie [Sale Lot #119] is estimated at $40,500-57,000, a price fare less than work created in their prime) can bring the buy to sure that they might be buying a beautiful piece of work, but the price is there namely for the sake of the the artist who created it, and nothing more.

To see the works up for sale, including the catalogue notes and the provenance on the auction, please go to the Sotheby’s Auction Website or to see the exact works that I reference in this article, please visit the following:

Joan Miro’s Tete

Salvador Dali’s Deesse De La Pluie