By the end of this week, New York will have come to the end of a fortnight of impressionist and contemporary art sales at its main auction houses. Already, the auction record for a Modigliani has been broken. By tomorrow, if the sales reach expectations, US$1.6 billion will have been spent.
For ordinary mortals — those dealing with the bleak everyday challenges of recession on both sides of the Atlantic — the prices are staggering. How come, when our own economy is struggling through the deepest downturn since World War II, the art market seems to have wriggled out of the crash of 2008 and auction houses are mounting what one expert calls “ambitious, pumping, thrusting” sales?
After last week’s impressionist sales, it is the turn of contemporary art to go under the hammer. At Christie’s, Campbell’s Soup Can With Can Opener by Andy Warhol is among the star turns, estimated at US$30 million to US$50 million. Sotheby’s has a Coca-Cola bottle canvas by him at US$20 million US$25 million.
photo: BLOOMBERG
The answer, or part of it, is that the very top of the art market is semi-detached from the movements of individual economies. Rather, it is bound up with the tastes and choices of a number of super-rich people in Europe and the US — and, increasingly, Russia, China and the Middle East. As Brett Gorvy, deputy chairman of Christie’s, put it: “The market is not reliant on one single economy at any one time.”
In pockets, at least, the very rich are spending on luxuries — a category into which contemporary art arguably falls — without apparent restraint. In Hong Kong this month, Sotheby’s held an auction of fine wine that saw an Asian buyer purchase three bottles of 1869 Chateau Lafite for US$232,000 each, a new record.
Meanwhile, the tastes of Chinese, Russian and Middle Eastern billionaires are increasingly embracing contemporary art. One of the stars of today’s Christie’s sale — estimated at US$40 million, over double its previous saleroom record of US$16.3 million — is a Roy Lichtenstein titled Ohhh ... Alright ....
“It’s not too racy,” said Sarah Thornton, art market expert and author of Seven Days in the Art World. “So it could easily go the Middle East. And it’s totally palatable to the Asian and Russian markets, where figurative work is preferred. It seems the taste for pretty girls is fairly universal.”
This month, blue chip London galleries such as White Cube and Timothy Taylor traveled to the Abu Dhabi art fair to sell to their growing numbers of Middle Eastern clients. Abu Dhabi’s rising appetite for Western art of all kinds is evidenced by the development of Saadiyat Island, a new cultural district in which branches of the Louvre and Guggenheim museums are planned to open by 2014.
Thornton has noticed a trend among the emerging super-rich. “They tend to start by collecting art of their own nations, whether Middle Eastern, Russian or Chinese. But — perhaps as their own businesses become global businesses — their predilections shift towards contemporary art.”
Having the “right” contemporary art is a totem of a certain kind of lifestyle, a badge of elite wealth. Gorvy says the numbers of collectors from Hong Kong, Taiwan and China “increased dramatically” over the past two years.
It was partly because of its international nature, spanning many economies at once, that the art market recovered from its big dip of late 2008 (in the wake of the collapse of Lehmann Brothers) faster than most had expected. “It took six months, and people expected it to be four to five years,” Gorvy said.
The speed of recovery itself breeds confidence, so that sellers who had been anxious to consign works of art to the saleroom two years ago are now returning to the market. There is, nonetheless, a different feel to the auction rooms than there was mid-decade.
Speculation on new names is down; tried and tested artists with impeccable records are on the up.
Amanda Sharp is cofounder of Frieze art fair, London’s most important annual selling event for contemporary art, and a barometer of the market as a whole.
Though last month’s fair was “in the main good,” the market was certainly “much slower than the extreme times of 2006.”
She added: “In 2008 there was fear in the air. Last year, you felt galleries had made tough decisions, rolled up their sleeves and carried on. This year it felt like the panic had gone. There was a post-bling feel to it, and most galleries were showing considered and restrained displays.”
There also practical reasons for buying art. At a time of economic uncertainty, art is a hedge against currency fluctuation. “If you buy a property in Mayfair, you will always have to sell it in pounds,” Thornton said. “If you buy art, its value will be in whatever denomination you choose, depending on where you choose to put it on
the block.”
Arguably, the art market has something in common with the gold market, which is bouncing at the moment, with prices topping US$1,400 an ounce last week. Art, like gold, is tangible — not a stock or a share, or complex derivative that cannot be physically embodied.
“I spoke to a gentleman the other day,” Gorvy said. “He bought a painting for US$5 million in 2008 and it’s now worth US$6 million. Whereas many of his shares are worth nothing at all.”
May 6 to May 12 Those who follow the Chinese-language news may have noticed the usage of the term zhuge (豬哥, literally ‘pig brother,’ a male pig raised for breeding purposes) in reports concerning the ongoing #Metoo scandal in the entertainment industry. The term’s modern connotations can range from womanizer or lecher to sexual predator, but it once referred to an important rural trade. Until the 1970s, it was a common sight to see a breeder herding a single “zhuge” down a rustic path with a bamboo whip, often traveling large distances over rugged terrain to service local families. Not only
Ahead of incoming president William Lai’s (賴清德) inauguration on May 20 there appear to be signs that he is signaling to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and that the Chinese side is also signaling to the Taiwan side. This raises a lot of questions, including what is the CCP up to, who are they signaling to, what are they signaling, how with the various actors in Taiwan respond and where this could ultimately go. In the last column, published on May 2, we examined the curious case of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) heavyweight Tseng Wen-tsan (鄭文燦) — currently vice premier
The last time Mrs Hsieh came to Cihu Park in Taoyuan was almost 50 years ago, on a school trip to the grave of Taiwan’s recently deceased dictator. Busloads of children were brought in to pay their respects to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣中正), known as Generalissimo, who had died at 87, after decades ruling Taiwan under brutal martial law. “There were a lot of buses, and there was a long queue,” Hsieh recalled. “It was a school rule. We had to bow, and then we went home.” Chiang’s body is still there, under guard in a mausoleum at the end of a path
Last week the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) released a set of very strange numbers on Taiwan’s wealth distribution. Duly quoted in the Taipei Times, the report said that “The Gini coefficient for Taiwanese households… was 0.606 at the end of 2021, lower than Australia’s 0.611, the UK’s 0.620, Japan’s 0.678, France’s 0.676 and Germany’s 0.727, the agency said in a report.” The Gini coefficient is a measure of relative inequality, usually of wealth or income, though it can be used to evaluate other forms of inequality. However, for most nations it is a number from .25 to .50