Art Theory - S2 Week 5 - 05/08/2019
blurred lines inside the art world
An amazing documentary debunching the art world and showing the dark side of the competitive actioning of artworks and being an artist, art dealer, and collector?.
A very interesting thing about this documentary is seeing all the sides of the art world and their take on it, the artist, collectors, and the dealers. There was a small bit about the museums but it wasn't too much as it wasn't viewing them in a good light. One of the most interesting things about the documentary was the structure of how they discussed each topic and brought it to light.
Blurred lines inside the art world are described as an overview of the major players in the contemporary art market and of the economic factors that motivate those individuals and institutions." according to IMDb
The interviewing side of the documentary is very relaxed and open about how they all feel about the competitiveness of the art world, and how most artists said the same thing over and over again. You should be producing art you are proud of and happy about not what everyone else wants. Staying true to yourself is what it means to be a true artist.
Another thing that was brought to light was the actions and how they are all rigged. It was to my surprise that people did not know this and how they are rigged. As it was always apparent to me that they had to be rigged to get to the minimum amount the artist wants it to be sold for or the dealer. The more the money the more the artist stays relevant, thought with that being said the artist themselves in the interviews said that they didn't care how much they sold their works for it was more important to them that they liked the works they were producing.
This thought of the auctions being rigged was quite interesting, because who was responsible for it being rigged? The artist? dealers? collectors or museums. It was also interesting that all prices and selling of items outside of the auctions were all secretive, all transactions with other clients where all secretive until the item was sold and the final pricing was then revealed. This is so the dealer can sell the item for the most money.
This shows how important the art dealer is, which is what they talked about in the documentary. The dealer knows everyone and the right buyer for the item, so the dealer is the key for the artist's success in the art world and how to get their name out there and keep it out there.
After watching the documentary, I had found myself doing some more research into the documentary and read some other reviews about it as I wanted to see what others thought of it. Especially the part about Damien Hirst, as it was interesting to hear how the art world viewed him as was the youngest British Artists, who dominated the art scene in the UK during the 1990s. He is reportedly the United Kingdom's richest living artist, with his wealth valued at £215m in the 2010 Sunday Times Rich List. I always didn't really have a view on him as I thought he was just over his head with his work and very up himself. Though I did admire him for his good business skills he had in the art world.
"Avrich finds such a complex discussion in the appraisal of art not for its quality but for its commercial value. Blurred Lines uncovers a nasty business where art is much like real estate: investors “flip” the art in rapid turnarounds to make a quick buck, while sellers and agents add cultural capital to works by ensuring that buyers with recognizable names or clout acquire the art. A painting, one collector says, gains little value in a transaction if Joe from Boise, Idaho buys it and hangs it in his living room, but few people in Blurred Lines talk about art as if it’s made for edification or posterity." (P.Mullen 2017)
"From Taryn Simon, Julian Schnabel and Rashid Johnson to Serbian performance artist Marina Abramović, the interviewees don’t beat around the bush in advocating the position that money has taken over the very meaning and value of art. Nowhere is this more clear than in the film’s portrayal of artists Damien Hirst, presented here as a money-grabbing opportunist, and Jeff Koons, an art marketeer like no other." (F.Crossley 2018)
"One interesting facet of the documentary is the question it poses about regulation of the market. Since it’s only those rich enough to spend money on contemporary art, and essentially be manipulated by those making the deals (see Banksy’s auction house), is it all a victimless crime? Yet it’s the artists that suffer at the hands of the rich; with so few able to make money from their work, the film asks an ethical question about whether the market should be regulated in line with, for example, the stock market." (F.Crossley 2018)
http://povmagazine.com/articles/view/review-blurred-lines-inside-the-art-world
http://www.miromagazine.com/film-tv/blurred-lines-inside-the-art-world-review/
An amazing documentary debunching the art world and showing the dark side of the competitive actioning of artworks and being an artist, art dealer, and collector?.
A very interesting thing about this documentary is seeing all the sides of the art world and their take on it, the artist, collectors, and the dealers. There was a small bit about the museums but it wasn't too much as it wasn't viewing them in a good light. One of the most interesting things about the documentary was the structure of how they discussed each topic and brought it to light.
Blurred lines inside the art world are described as an overview of the major players in the contemporary art market and of the economic factors that motivate those individuals and institutions." according to IMDb
The interviewing side of the documentary is very relaxed and open about how they all feel about the competitiveness of the art world, and how most artists said the same thing over and over again. You should be producing art you are proud of and happy about not what everyone else wants. Staying true to yourself is what it means to be a true artist.
Another thing that was brought to light was the actions and how they are all rigged. It was to my surprise that people did not know this and how they are rigged. As it was always apparent to me that they had to be rigged to get to the minimum amount the artist wants it to be sold for or the dealer. The more the money the more the artist stays relevant, thought with that being said the artist themselves in the interviews said that they didn't care how much they sold their works for it was more important to them that they liked the works they were producing.
This thought of the auctions being rigged was quite interesting, because who was responsible for it being rigged? The artist? dealers? collectors or museums. It was also interesting that all prices and selling of items outside of the auctions were all secretive, all transactions with other clients where all secretive until the item was sold and the final pricing was then revealed. This is so the dealer can sell the item for the most money.
This shows how important the art dealer is, which is what they talked about in the documentary. The dealer knows everyone and the right buyer for the item, so the dealer is the key for the artist's success in the art world and how to get their name out there and keep it out there.
After watching the documentary, I had found myself doing some more research into the documentary and read some other reviews about it as I wanted to see what others thought of it. Especially the part about Damien Hirst, as it was interesting to hear how the art world viewed him as was the youngest British Artists, who dominated the art scene in the UK during the 1990s. He is reportedly the United Kingdom's richest living artist, with his wealth valued at £215m in the 2010 Sunday Times Rich List. I always didn't really have a view on him as I thought he was just over his head with his work and very up himself. Though I did admire him for his good business skills he had in the art world.
"Avrich finds such a complex discussion in the appraisal of art not for its quality but for its commercial value. Blurred Lines uncovers a nasty business where art is much like real estate: investors “flip” the art in rapid turnarounds to make a quick buck, while sellers and agents add cultural capital to works by ensuring that buyers with recognizable names or clout acquire the art. A painting, one collector says, gains little value in a transaction if Joe from Boise, Idaho buys it and hangs it in his living room, but few people in Blurred Lines talk about art as if it’s made for edification or posterity." (P.Mullen 2017)
"From Taryn Simon, Julian Schnabel and Rashid Johnson to Serbian performance artist Marina Abramović, the interviewees don’t beat around the bush in advocating the position that money has taken over the very meaning and value of art. Nowhere is this more clear than in the film’s portrayal of artists Damien Hirst, presented here as a money-grabbing opportunist, and Jeff Koons, an art marketeer like no other." (F.Crossley 2018)
"One interesting facet of the documentary is the question it poses about regulation of the market. Since it’s only those rich enough to spend money on contemporary art, and essentially be manipulated by those making the deals (see Banksy’s auction house), is it all a victimless crime? Yet it’s the artists that suffer at the hands of the rich; with so few able to make money from their work, the film asks an ethical question about whether the market should be regulated in line with, for example, the stock market." (F.Crossley 2018)
http://povmagazine.com/articles/view/review-blurred-lines-inside-the-art-world
http://www.miromagazine.com/film-tv/blurred-lines-inside-the-art-world-review/
Comments
Post a Comment