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.

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.