Art Fairs and The Economics of Art

[The Economics of Art]

[The Economics of Art]

For the most part, the art at art fairs reflects the changing whims of the ravenous hordes of investors banging on the door of the contemporary art world, looking to “flip” works of art like stocks. — Hyperallergic

I’m not sure if this was written out of hope or ignorance, but in either case it is dead wrong.

The “ravenous hordes” are those cashing in on artists who remain - as the foundation of the entire industry - at the bottom of the food chain. Some of the most egregious offenders are the Art Fairs themselves, which have found a way to insert themselves as yet another middleman into sales - or the hope of sales, to be more accurate.

Art fairs are highly profitable affairs - for the fairs, not necessarily for artists and galleries. Exhibition fees are steep and the additional costs for transport, travel, staffing, and lodging can make participation a dubious venture at best. It’s gotten so bad that many galleries have abandoned the fairs altogether or are charging artists to participate in them. Some formerly brick and mortar galleries now exist only on paper, having traded their rental overhead for the costs of participation in the fairs. Some artists have gone so far as to represent themselves as galleries, trading the art dealer’s commission for the art fair attendance fees (and the hope of sales).

Art fairs are the Uber of the art world, and the galleries are the drivers. The fairs provide (in theory at least) high volumes of traffic for the centralized shopping of curated art. In reality the curation is largely based on which galleries can afford to buy in. The vast majority of traffic is there for entertainment, not buying, and volume is subject to weather. Attendance figures are like box office receipts; a fair’s success is measured by the number of visitors.

The shift in the marketing of art from galleries to art fairs has most obviously come at the financial expense of the galleries. But the negative effects go far beyond the cost. The vast quantity of work displayed - often of questionable merit - is overwhelming and dulls the senses, and is multiplied by the sheer number of often simultaneous art fairs.

Art galleries face enormous competition at the fairs: rather than having an identity and place within a local community, galleries are placed in stall in what amounts to an international flea market. For quality galleries collector relationships are critical and client lists are fiercely guarded. Personal relationships are typically not built at fairs, except maybe with the art fair staff. Some galleries try to poach artists from other galleries - they look for what is selling (or supposedly selling, as not all Red Dots are genuine).

The artwork itself is at risk not just from shipping damage but also from excessive handling under high pressure in ridiculously small time frames. The necessity of a gallery to sell anything to help recoup the costs can have a negative effect on the artists in the form of high discounts - which not only can mean less for the artist but devalues the work as well (note to artists: have a clear consignment agreement that specifies the maximum allowable discount).

In the end it comes down to separating hype (as quoted in the Hyperallergic article above) from reality.