Art World News

What Have I Learned About the Art Market Since January 2018? A Look Back and a Farewell

What Have I Learned About the Art Market Since January 2018? A Look Back and a Farewell

Every week, Artnet News brings you The Gray Market. The column decodes important stories from the previous week—and offers unparalleled insight into the inner workings of the art industry in the process.

This week, a sense of an ending…

Closing Time

If I’ve learned the wisdom of one journalistic adage since I joined the Artnet News staff full-time in January 2018, it’s not to bury the lede. So, in that spirit, this will be the final edition of the Gray Market in this space, as I say farewell to my friends and colleagues here to move onto something new (to be discussed in another place and time). 

For context, I first started the Gray Market as a freelancer in Los Angeles in December 2013. That means I’ve been writing under this name for about nine and a half years (technically 9.6, but who besides me is enough of a maniac about specificity to count?). For about five and a half of those years, meaning the majority of the column’s lifespan, its adopted home has been here at Artnet News. 

That stretch of time has involved a lot of personal change for me: relocating from the west coast to Brooklyn, watching both my parents retire, making it through the pandemic in good health (without leaving New York), congratulating at least a dozen new friends on becoming parents (y’all have been busy), and meeting my wife (and being smart enough to marry her, obviously), to name just a few milestones. “Bittersweet” is the word I’ve tended to fall back on to describe how leaving feels, but I hope it’s a mark of my development as a writer that I also feel like that word alone is woefully insufficient. 

But no one reads this column for extended personal reflections. What you come here for is reflections on the art business! And based on some of the stories this column addressed during my first few weeks on the job, five and a half years turns out to be an eye-opening span of time to look back on the news in this curious, one-of-a-kind industry. Besides just being downright eerie in the trajectory it reveals, this review also cements that even the most expected changes sometimes play out on an unexpectedly long timeline—and not always for the reasons we anticipate, either.

Case in point, my first Gray Market as an Artnet News employee focused on what was felt at the time as a tectonic shift in the business of American institutions: the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s announcement that it would begin charging a mandatory admission fee to non-residents of New York effective March 1, 2018. At that point, the cost for one typical out-of-state adult became $25, a figure that cultural commentators almost universally blasted for its perceived exclusionary effect. 

Fast forward to August 1, 2023the day that I filed the column you’re now readingand perhaps the biggest art story was the Guggenheim’s announcement that it will raise the price of its adult general admission ticket from $25 to $30. The new price matches the one implemented by the Met in July 2022, as well as by the Whitney Museum of American Art last month. (The Philadelphia Museum of Art also charges $30, while the Art Institute of Chicago charges $32.)

While it’s true that these latest price hikes prove that the financial struggles of even the U.S.’s most renowned museums have only worsened over the past half-decade, the reasons have shifted, too. Yes, running a top-flight institution continues to get more expensive because of inflation, upkeep, and the pressure to physically expand or renovate the premises in a sector where the bar is always being raised for the appearance of success. Museum leadership nationwide has found few, if any, new levers to pull to try to generate meaningful revenue to cover all of these escalating costs, too. 

Wu Tsang Anthem (2021). © Wu Tsang. Installation view, Wu Tsang: Anthem, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, July 23–September 6, 2021. Photo: David Heald © Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2021.

Wu Tsang Anthem (2021). © Wu Tsang. Installation view, Wu Tsang: Anthem, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, July 23–September 6, 2021. Photo: David Heald © Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2021.

Yet the shortfalls at major American museums have been exacerbated by two factors that were largely, if not totally, unforeseeable in January of 2018: the unionization wave that has walloped a sector historically content to pay staff less-than-subsistence wages, and Covid’s lasting legacy of reduced attendance at museums. For instance, Zachary Small of the Times relayed that annual visitor tallies at the Art Institute of Chicago are still down roughly 25 percent from pre-pandemic levels, while the Art Newspaper reported earlier this year that the Met’s 2022 attendance total had declined 34 percent relative to 2019. So while the underlying trend has been consistent throughout my time at Artnet News, the forces driving it have only multiplied.

What other telling stories were on the Gray Market docket in my opening weeks here? Well, in early January of 2018, David Zwirner announced plans to build a new $50 million, five-story gallery in Chelsea designed by Pritzker Prize-winning architect Renzo Piano. Zwirner targeted autumn of 2020 as a tentative opening date for the project. My take focused on the fact that it would also be Piano’s first ever commercial gallery, a natural next step for the museum-ification of the sector.

However, on July 26less than a week before the publication of the column you’re now reading, and nearly three years past Zwirner’s original ETA—the mega-gallery announced that the collaboration with Piano was no more. Zwirner has instead redirected the $50 million budget into two separate projects in Chelsea: a new 18,000-square-foot gallery on West 19th Street designed by longtime collaborator Annabelle Selldorf, and a 36,000-square-foot office space on West 20th Street that opened last month.

If you’re eager to label this news a turning point in the gallery business’s winners-take-all era, however, I’d recommend pumping the brakes. Zwirner isn’t spending any less money than he planned to; he basically just broke a dollar into two 50-cent pieces. The conversion also apparently netted him an extra 4,000 square feet of space. I do think the state of the market has a serious right hook in store for many galleries that expanded unnecessarily using the artificial sustenance of pandemic-era loans, but David Zwirner is not the place to look for evidence of the friction.

Yet the original project’s collapse does show how the über-professionalized, big-money art market is more exposed to external complications than ever before. Robin Pogrebin of the Times noted that the canceled, Piano-designed gallery “was part of a larger development by the investor Uri Chaitchik of Casco Development that encountered financial trouble during the pandemic.” Headwinds in the real-estate market can only fragment this kind of alliance if big-money developers see big-money galleries as viable partners in the first place. So even in its kiboshing, the Zwirner headquarters-not-to-be proves that these two adjacent industries see each other as equals to an extent they haven’t previously.

Rounding out the month of January 2018, In Other Words, the Charlotte Burns-helmed media wing of the now-defunct, Sotheby’s-owned advisory firm Art Agency, Partners, relayed rumors that Frieze was planning to augment its London and New York fairs with a new annual expo in Los Angeles in January 2019. While a representative from the fair brand neither confirmed nor denied the reporting at the time, it took only four more weeks for Frieze to officially announce the move (although the new fair’s dates would be in February 2019, not January 2019).

Visitors streaming into Frieze Los Angeles, 2023. Photo: Casey Kelbaugh. Courtesy of Casey Kelbaugh and Frieze.

Visitors streaming into Frieze Los Angeles, 2023. Photo: Casey Kelbaugh. Courtesy of Casey Kelbaugh and Frieze.

Now zoom ahead to July 13, 2023—three weeks prior to the publication of the column you’re now reading—when Frieze announced a different kind of stateside expansion: the acquisition of the Armory Show and the pending acquisition of Expo Chicago, two of the U.S.’s longest-running regional fairs. (The latter deal is slated to close later this year.) Although the Armory and Expo will continue operating under their own names with their existing directors now working alongside Frieze’s other fair brass, per a company statement, the transactions mean that four of Frieze’s seven annual events will now take place in the U.S., the world’s most robust art market. 

This creates a sharp contrast to the closest analogue we have, MCH Group’s short-lived campaign to acquire significant equity stakes in regional art fairs scattered across multiple countries between mid-2016 and late 2018. Which makes Frieze’s expansion-by-acquisition less a revolutionary development than a new strain of the same consolidation trend that has been playing out in the art business for most of this century, including the last five and a half years.

Even some of the smaller stories I touched on during the opening weeks of my Artnet News tenure have boomeranged back in strange ways in recent weeks. Also in late January 2018, Sotheby’s (then still under the leadership of CEO Tad Smith) announced that it had acquired Thread Genius, a startup described by Tech Crunch as offering “a set of algorithms that can both instantly identify objects and then recommend images of similar objects to the viewer.” In other words, its killer app was machine learning, an important stepping stone on the pathway to the more advanced artificial intelligence that is now an inescapable part of the art-business discourse in the summer of 2023. 

Yet almost no one cared about the acquisition at the time. Instead, the central art-tech story of 2018 was the blockchain, mostly as a means of creating either title registries for physical artworks or fractionalized investment opportunities for people who, frankly, I would advise to find better uses for their money. More than four years elapsed between Sotheby’s investment in Thread Genius and the public imagination’s takeover by ChatGPT, DALL-E, and their A.I.-driven competitors in mid-2022. As of my writing, another year has passed since that storming, and it’s an understatement to say we’re still short on clarity about the technology’s likely impact on the arts. This simple math underscores that even allegedly world-changing innovations need more time to take root than it often sounds like in the moment.  

Last but not least, in early February of 2018, I called a little attention to a talk at the 92nd Street Y between then-72-year-old mega-dealer Larry Gagosian and longtime associate Glenn Fuhrman, the financier and collector behind the FLAG Art Foundation. To me, the most newsworthy aspect of the chat was this brief exchange: 

Fuhrman: I can’t think of any other billion-dollar business in the world that theoretically could disappear because it’s so reliant on a leader. Is your business something that could survive you?

Gagosian: We are working on that… I don’t have children and that’s usually how these legacies are established… But this is something that is really important to me.

There can’t be more than about six people reading this column right now who don’t already know that its publication is only a week removed from that of New Yorker staff writer Patrick Radden Keefe’s endlessly discussed profile of a now-78-year-old Gagosian. Based on Keefe’s reporting, however, it almost sounds as if Gagosian’s thinking about his gallery’s long-term future (or at least his willingness to discuss it frankly) has regressed in the five-plus years since he spent a few words on it onstage with Furhman. 

Young buck Larry Gagosian cozying up to Leo Castelli in 1996. (Photo by Ron Galella, Ltd./Ron Galella Collection via Getty Images)

Young buck Larry Gagosian cozying up to Leo Castelli in 1996. (Photo by Ron Galella, Ltd./Ron Galella Collection via Getty Images)

In the piece, Gagosian distances the gallery’s recently formed advisory board from succession planning “per se,” and multiple episodes recounted by others (most notably Issy Wood, who he tried to recruit to the gallery) hinge on Gagosian’s unwillingness to even acknowledge that he’ll one day have to retire, let alone die. In other words, it’s not just that we’re still speculating about the same mega-dealer’s succession plan five and a half years later; it’s that we’ve arguably moved backwards even as the subject has become more relevant.

Fold these early 2018 stories and their 2023 sequels together, and you’re left with something that only time can make plain: namely, that for all the talk about seismic shifts, unprecedented developments, disruptive technology, and other factors, the art business is still largely riding the same trends captained by the same entities as it was when I started this job five and a half years ago. But the motives for these trends’ persistence haven’t necessarily been predictable. More importantly, they haven’t even necessarily been within the control of the people and businesses that have benefited from them the most.

Whether the impetus was a global pandemic, a cross-industry partnership gone awry, or a strategic pivot perhaps informed by a more ambitious rival’s earlier mistakes, there has been no surer way to play yourself in the art industry than to believe that the business is still small enough to give you and your partners even relative autonomy. At the same time, success still often demands an unshakable belief in yourself and your product, whether that means a new tech or the old standby of hard-charging salesmanship in an eternally subjective trade. It’s a paradox that no one should envy trying to manifest.

Sure, things in the art industry have changed since January 2018. They just haven’t done so at any uniform pace, or for uniformly foreseeable reasons. And even after accounting for the differences, most of the landscape looks similar to when I first started at Artnet News. 

In light of all that, my advice is to be skeptical anytime someone tells you they’re going to change anything structural in the medium term. But also keep in mind that the choice to change yourself and your circumstances is still often yours. 

‘Til next time, remember: no one’s here for a long time, so at least try to make it a good time while it lasts.

Follow Artnet News on Facebook:
Want to stay ahead of the art world? Subscribe to our newsletter to get the breaking news, eye-opening interviews, and incisive critical takes that drive the conversation forward.

SWAIA Santa Fe Indian Market: The World’s Greatest Art Fair

SWAIA Santa Fe Indian Market: The World’s Greatest Art Fair

What makes a great art fair?

Size.

How about more than 1,000 artists spread over several city blocks?

Quality, of course.

Each of those 1,000-plus contemporary artists are juried into the event, leaders in their fields.

Diversity.

Artworks in this fair are broken out into 10 distinct categories ranging from jewelry to pottery, sculpture, textiles, and two-dimensional art including painting, drawing, graphics and photography.

Invited artists represent over 200 sovereign nations.

Community.

This art fair feels more like a reunion than an exercise in snobbery. Hundreds of the artists and thousands of the visitors have been attending for decades. Artists use the event to catch up on a year’s worth of news. Friendships are formed with collectors.

Here, artists greet visitors in person and chat.

No one’s going to Art Basel Miami Beach, meeting Hank Willis Thomas, and spending 10 minutes talking him up about his work.

Value.

Collectors buy direct from artists at this fair. No gallery markup, no middleman, no shenanigans on price with some customers being given sweetheart deals unavailable to all, or other customers forbidden from buying certain artworks because they don’t fit a profile. 99% of what’s for sale here can be purchased for less than $5,000.

And entry is free. Guests just walk up and start looking at art.

The cheapest tickets at The Armory Show, New York’s art fair, run $35.

Artist booths occupy space surrounded local restaurants. No $15 wine glasses or $21 sandwich hustles at this art fair. If you want a refreshment–Frito Pie perhaps–just bop into one of the many adjacent eateries.

Extras.

Over the two days of this art fair, hours of live musical performances, dancing, and a haute couture fashion show are combined with numerous smaller satellite fairs, museum and gallery exhibitions, and artist meet-and-greets creating a 48-hour wonderland of the arts no person could ever experience entirely even if they were able to divide themselves in thirds and spread out.

Location.

Sunny Santa Fe in stunning northern New Mexico hosts this art fair with the main event occurring outdoors. Watch the weather and wear sunscreen.

Described is the Southwestern Association for Indian Arts annual Santa Fe Indian Market. This year’s 101st edition takes place August 19th and 20th, free and open to the public, with paid advance preview opportunities on the 18th.

“Market,” as it’s referred to in shorthand, is more than the largest cultural event in the U.S. Southwest. It’s more than the largest Indigenous art market in the world. For the reasons listed, it is the world’s greatest art fair, an experience every art lover should partake in at least once.

Home to roughly 300 art galleries, including those along famed Canyon Road, and a dozen world class art museums, including the Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, Santa Fe is a major arts destination year round. It is the epicenter of the Native American art world. During Indian Market, it becomes the epicenter of the art world.

Nothing else remotely approaches its scale, caliber or legacy.

Emotional Faces Fuse with Flora and Fauna in Abi Castillo’s Playful Ceramics

Emotional Faces Fuse with Flora and Fauna in Abi Castillo’s Playful Ceramics

From the series ‘Sea Creatures.’ All images © Abi Castello, shared with permission

Oh, to be a flower allergic to pollen! In Abi Castillo’s playful ceramics, flowers sprout from the tops of expressive heads, blossoms sniffle, and vases contend with their contents—and the bees they attract. The Galicia, Spain-based artist creates characters that reflect her own experiences and emotions, becoming what she describes as alter-egos into which she can pour all of her feelings. She describes a “need to give life to objects, always looking for eyes to look at. That’s why faces are very important.”

Interested in the relationships between mysticism, drama, beauty, and the grotesque, Castillo imbues a growing cast of personalities with organic qualities, from coral to sprouting cheeks. She focuses on faces as a way to express humor or irony, and begins by making sketches that illustrate the final assembly. “The ceramic work is a slow process, where it is the clay that marks the drying times and where patience is very important,” she says. “The process can last from a few weeks to several months.”

Find more of Castillo’s work on her website and Instagram.

 

From the series ‘Drama.’ Photo by Sandra MG

Pieces from ‘Allergic Party.’ Photo by Emma Ovin

Flowers from the series ‘Allergic Party.’ Photo by Sandra MG

Photo by Sandra MG

Left: “A moco tendido.” Right: “Nómada con lunares”

“Nómada”

‘Drama’ series. Photo by Sandra MG

“Seres da noite”

Detail of “Seres da noite”

Do stories and artists like this matter to you? Become a Colossal Member today and support independent arts publishing for as little as $5 per month. The article Emotional Faces Fuse with Flora and Fauna in Abi Castillo’s Playful Ceramics appeared first on Colossal.

Fractional Ownership Will Open Up the Art Market, Says Freeport CEO

Fractional Ownership Will Open Up the Art Market, Says Freeport CEO

The art market has changed a lot in the last few years. Now, with blockchain-based fractional art firms, investing in art is not just the domain of wealthy or institutional investors. BeInCrypto spoke to Colin Johnson, CEO of Freeport, about security tokens, registering with the SEC, and why smaller artists can benefit from a more open market.

Once, investing in the art market meant attending an auction at a place like Sotheby’s or Christie’s in New York or London. Or you would send a proxy bidder to fight for the artwork on your behalf. At the end of the event, you would either go home with a prized artwork or not. Now, the barriers to entry are lower, with investors no longer needing to own an entire item. Today collectors can own “shares” in a piece in what’s known as fractionalized ownership.

The Art Market Performs Better Than the S&P 500

There is plenty of money to be made in the contemporary art market today, too. Over the last 25 years, contemporary art investments have outperformed the S&P 500, a stock market index that tracks the performance of 500 large publicly traded companies in the United States. 

The average annual return of gold and other assets worldwide from 1971 to 2022. Source: Statistica.

DollarSprout figures show that art consistently delivers average returns of 7.6% annually. (Although, a report by Citi GPS puts annual returns as high as 14%.)

According to Statistica, those returns are nearly identical to gold, which recorded an average annual return of 7.78% from January 1971 to December 2022. For comparison, commodities—like crude oil, natural gas, and wheat—had average annual returns of 8.3%. US cash, on the other hand, registered only 4.23% over the same period.

So while we might not all agree on art’s aesthetic qualities, it’s safe to say that the contemporary art market is good for lining your pockets, even if your tastes lie elsewhere.

Fractionalized Ownership of Art

Masterworks, founded in 2017, was the first to allow investors to own part of an artwork, treating it more like a financial asset than a creative product (an innovation that will not be to everyone’s liking).

However, the barriers to entry were still quite high for most, requiring a $15,000 USD minimum buy-in. A hefty sum for the cautious investor. Then there’s a 1.5% annual management fee that includes security, insurance, and related costs.

However, a report by industry journal ARTnews has revealed signs that the fractionalized ownership pioneer may be in trouble, with sources telling the magazine of “conflicting business strategies, rifts between management and key teams… nonexistent human resources practices” and “ethically questionable” and potentially illegal selling tactics and employee incentive structures.

Johnson’s Freeport, then, is the attempt to give the idea another go, with the added benefits of blockchain technology thrown in. Its model uses “security tokens”—digital tokens on a blockchain that represent ownership of real-world assets.

They’re “still a relatively new concept, even in the most technologically advanced societies,” explains Johnson. “They are not yet widely understood.”

“The concept of tokenization, especially when linked to tangible assets like fine art, presents a new and exciting opportunity to increase global access to assets of value that have previously been inaccessible to many,” he continued.

Unlike Masterwork, the minimum buy-in for a slice of a Warhol print (one of ten thousand “shares”) is in the tens-to-hundreds of dollars.

A Compliance-First Route

In the United States, Freeport already has permission from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to sell Regulation A securities. A welcome relief to investors watching the ongoing regulatory drama in crypto world.

On June 5, the SEC charged Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, and its founder Changpeng Zhao, with 13 counts of violating securities laws. The day after, in a dramatic one-two punch, the SEC hit the world’s second-largest exchange, Coinbase, with similar charges. The SEC under Gary Gensler has also charged numerous other crypto firms operating in the United States.

Art performance as an asset class during COVID-19.
Art was one of the best-performing assets during the COVID-19 pandemic. Source: Citi GPS

“Navigating the SEC’s Regulation A review is a complex process that demands rigorous financial disclosure and legal compliance,” explained Johnson. He went on:

“This process is made especially difficult when taking into account the generally unregulated digital asset market. Freeport chose to build with a compliance-first approach. Our team was committed to transparency and thoroughness in our application process, which we believe contributed to our successful regulatory clearance despite the harsh enforcement environment.”

One barrier to SEC approval, and one reason why some firms avoid it, is the lengthy approval process. Getting audited, draft documents, and gather paperwork can take nine to twelve months, Johnson said.

Gensler’s SEC Applies 1930s Securities Laws

The second problem, Johnson told BeInCrypto, is cost. “Our first law firm wanted $350K for the Reg A filing alone, as an example. We were able to get that down using a more efficient firm, but it’s still considerable.”

The final barrier is the approval itself. As anyone familiar with Gary Gensler’s tenure as Chair of the SEC will note, the regulator is hell-bent on applying 1930s securities laws to 21st-century technology, including anything to do with crypto.

“The SEC is very willing to work with you if what you’re building fits within the confines of securities that have a precedent,” Johnson continued. He elaborated:

“For us, the tokens that are issued can be directly correlated to something familiar—stocks, or shares. Leaning on that familiarity is what ultimately allowed us to get approved. Much of the SEC enforcement is on entities who chose not to request qualification. We specifically chose the longer route so that we wouldn’t end up in that position.”

Securities & Exchange Commission SEC Crypto
Gary Gensler (pictured) has become a villain to the blockchain industry for his heavy-handed enforcement and regulation.

Own a Slice of a Warhol

Platforms like Freeport aim to offer the ability to own part of an instantly recognizable masterpiece. In the case of Johnson’s company, investors are able to choose from some of Andy Warhol’s most notable works.

However, while the appeal of part-owning a Warhol is obvious, can fractionalized ownership work for less notable artists?

Johnson told BeInCrypto that artists with less exposure still stand to benefit. “By tokenizing their work, they can access a global market of investors and art-lovers,” he said.

“Which can provide them with increased visibility and financial support. Moreover, investors get the opportunity to support emerging artists and potentially reap the benefits if these artists’ works appreciate over time.”

So, what’s next for an innovator in this space?

Like others in crypto, blockchain, and DeFi, Freeport is eyeing the next wave of investment opportunities. As regulation around digital assets settles, Johnson and his team are exploring multiple avenues. These include lending against art tokens, trading tokens on exchanges, and viewing owned art assets across chains.

Disclaimer

In adherence to the Trust Project guidelines, BeInCrypto is committed to unbiased, transparent reporting. This news article aims to provide accurate, timely information. However, readers are advised to verify facts independently and consult with a professional before making any decisions based on this content.

Sponsored

Sponsored

Boulder County Farmers Markets: At the Market: AgriCULTURE exhibit explores relationships between land, growers, eaters

Boulder County Farmers Markets: At the Market: AgriCULTURE exhibit explores relationships between land, growers, eaters

Boulder County Farmers Markets

Why support local food and agriculture? For Boulder County Farmers Markets, this central question — our why — feels like the sort of wondering that is best answered through experience.

Why does this apple cost more than what I can get at the grocery store? Bite into it, and you’ll discover its flavor and crunch can’t be compared to two-for-$1 crops. Why should I go out of my way to buy dairy and meat from local farmers? Try giving their cows a scratch on the snout and walk away from preferring to purchase from factory farms where animal welfare doesn’t matter.

Why should we all care about supporting local food businesses? Enjoy a sample and conversation with a small business owner, and pretty soon you’ll find yourself rooting for them, too.

The AgriCULTURE exhibition dives deep into the importance of soil, like this awe-inspiring display of inflatable microbes at the Longmont Museum. (Boulder County Farmers Markets – Courtesy Photo)

In an age in which we’re more connected to our smart devices than our neighbors, the community surrounding local food can be just as nourishing as the bounty itself. As farmers markets, it’s our responsibility to curate those lightbulb moments that catapult casual shoppers into lifelong local food enthusiasts.

This is why Boulder County Farmers Markets is proud to support the AgriCULTURE: Art Inspired by the Land exhibition as it embarks to create the kinds of experiences that transform our understanding of local food and agriculture.

AgriCULTURE: Art Inspired by the Land is a collaborative, contemporary art exhibition pairing more than 15 artists with Boulder County farmers to create new, site-specific visual works inspired by farming and the natural world. This exhibition aims to unfold a unique experience by intersecting art and agriculture to inspire visitors to think about their connection with food and nature in new ways.

Currently on display at the Boulder Museum of Contemporary Art and the Longmont Museum, residents throughout Boulder County can roam through thoughtful artworks on a wide range of topics relating to farming, land access and community.

Admission to BMoCA, on 13th Street, is free during the Boulder Farmers Market..(Boulder County Farmers Markets - Courtesy Photo)
Admission to BMoCA, on 13th Street, is free during the Boulder Farmers Market..(Boulder County Farmers Markets – Courtesy Photo)

Market-goers can expect to find art created in partnership with three Boulder County Farmers Market vendors: MASA Farm and Seed Foundation, Aspen Moon Farm and Black Cat Organic Farm. “Beyond our family, our greatest treasure is to be a part of this wonderful community,” said Eric Skokan, owner of Black Cat Farm and its farm-to-table restaurant, Bramble & Hare.

“We see our farm as one of the many threads that hold our community together. For us, the agriCULTURE exhibit was a meaningful time for reflection on the how and why we do this work. To see our work reflected through the eyes and masterfully skilled hands of a gifted artist was stunning. To see our work literally woven through our place is profound.”

The exhibition is on display at the Boulder Museum of Contemporary Art through Oct. 1. Admission is free during market hours, so be sure to stop by before you grab your market haul during the Boulder Farmers Market on Wednesdays and Saturdays.

The Longmont Museum will continue to host the exhibition through Jan. 7. Visit their website to learn about admission prices. Discounted prices are available for seniors, students and individuals who qualify for SNAP. Admission is free every second Saturday of the month.

Aqueous Photographs by Maria Svarbova Synchronize Swimmers Within Cavernous Soviet-Era Pools

Aqueous Photographs by Maria Svarbova Synchronize Swimmers Within Cavernous Soviet-Era Pools

All images © Maria Svarbova, shared with permission

Perched along the edges of swimming pools or bobbing just above the water’s surface, the subjects of Maria Svarbova‘s photographs enliven the interiors of vintage swimming pools. Focusing primarily on Soviet-era architecture (previously), the artist carefully composes figures wearing bathing suits and caps within the colorfully tiled, cavernous spaces. Digitally manipulated to accentuate repetition and precise symmetry, the figures align perfectly as if frozen in the moment just before diving in.

Svarbova often captures a mood of detachment through the expressionless faces of her subjects and an aqueous color palette, blurring the distinction between the past, present, and future. Routine actions “are reframed with a visual purity that is soothing and symmetrical and at times reverberant with an ethereal stillness,” reads a statement. “The overall effect evokes a contemplative silence in an extended moment of promise and awareness—a quality difficult to achieve in the rapid pace of contemporary life.”

Find more work on Svarbova’s website, Behance, and Instagram.

 

Three swimmers in different colored swim caps who are poised to dive in to a pool.

A symmetrical photograph of dozens of swimmers lined up beside a swimming pool.

A symmetrical photograph of six swimmers viewed from behind with arms linked. A symmetrical photograph of seven swimmers in yellow swimming suits.

A swimmer with her face half-submerged in water.

A swimmer in a yellow suit and red cap, viewed partly above and below water.

A swimmer in a yellow swimming suit who appears to be stepping off a high tiled ledge.  A symmetrical photograph of six swimmers in white swimming suits, showing off their biceps.

Do stories and artists like this matter to you? Become a Colossal Member today and support independent arts publishing for as little as $5 per month. The article Aqueous Photographs by Maria Svarbova Synchronize Swimmers Within Cavernous Soviet-Era Pools appeared first on Colossal.

Phoenicia Festival of the Arts – 8/4-8/6

Phoenicia Festival of the Arts – 8/4-8/6
image

A new art festival is coming to our region this weekend August 4 through the 6. The brainchild of local gallery owner and artist, Christina Varga, Phoenicia Festival of the Arts will span the entirety of Main Street in Phoenicia, New York.

This free, three-day event features a Main Street Market for Artists and Artisans and plenty of family-friendly activities and happenings including an eclectic mix of musical, theatrical, and visual events.

The Main Street Market kicks off with a Night Market on Friday and Art Markets on Saturday and Sunday. Attendees will enjoy live outdoor music, poetry readings, open mics and artist demonstrations as well as artisan-made gifts, artwork, curated vintage collections, ceramics, sculpture and more.

Christina Varga joins us.

‘Controversy at Kiran Nadar Museum of Art in Delhi raises important questions over private museums in public life’

‘Controversy at Kiran Nadar Museum of Art in Delhi raises important questions over private museums in public life’

India’s leading private museum of Modern and contemporary art, the Kiran Nadar Museum of Art (KNMA) in Delhi, has been embroiled in a controversy since early July following the termination of its manager of curatorial research and publications, Sandip K Luis.

Luis was terminated over a Facebook post in which he expressed critical views against a state-organised exhibition held in the National Gallery of Modern Art (NGMA) in New Delhi. Jan Shakti was organised by India’s Ministry of Culture in collaboration with the NGMA to celebrate the 100th episode of a radio show hosted by India’s prime minister, whose right-wing and Hindu nationalist policies have proved highly polarising.

Among other aspects of the show, Luis criticised the complicity of its participating artists, curators and the patron Kiran Nadar in instrumentalising contemporary art for government propaganda. Nadar, who served as an advisor to the exhibition, is India’s most prominent modern and contemporary art collector, and the founder and chairperson of the eponymous museum where Luis was an employee.

Since Luis’s termination, hundreds of people from the art and academic community around the world have expressed their support for him via social media platforms and a signature campaign demanding his reinstatement. Among the signatories are artists, scholars, curators, writers and students that include art historian and former dean of The School of Arts and Aesthetics in Jawaharlal Nehru University, Prof. Parul Dave Mukherjee, along with artist and former curator of the Kochi-Muziris Biennale, Anita Dube.

Luis’s termination also prompted the prominent Bangladeshi photojournalist Shahidul Alam to pull his solo show at the KNMA—which was planned to open on 17 July—at the last minute. Speaking to the Indian Express, Alam voiced concern for “the clear endorsement by Nadar of art events which are part of the propaganda machinery of the current Indian regime, and the censure of people who make legitimate critiques of such associations”.

A text by Luis detailing his version of the events can be read here.

The controversy has triggered a discussion in India that has been long overdue: a discussion on the accountability of private museums, and what it means for private entities running museums, foundations and institutions to be public. Is it merely about being open to the public? Or is it also about being answerable to the public? While Luis’s termination pertains to a Delhi museum, its ramifications bear relevance to private museums around the world.

Being realistic

While Luis’s termination has provoked outrage from across the cultural community, there has also been a groundswell of support in defence of Nadar and the museum, especially among India’s leading gallerists. Peter Nagy, the founder of Nature Morte gallery in Delhi, wrote in an Instagram post earlier this month that “no one has done more to support the progressive and serious art forms of India in the past decade” than Nadar.

While the extent of this superlative could be argued, it is undeniable that both Nadar and her institution have played a highly central role in the recent history of Indian art. Not only is the KNMA open to the public free of charge, it has supported a considerable number of cultural initiatives in India and overseas, commissioned artists to produce new works and supported the travel of exhibitions internationally. It also collects a great deal of work, financially supporting a contemporary art ecosystem in which there are few serious patrons and virtually no state support.

The emphasis on the importance of private museums has been systematically institutionalised in the last two decades in India, as well as other parts of the world. It has developed from a structural transformation of the field, where the art market has been positioned as the only system that can sustain art and artists. This logic dictates that without art collectors there would be no art market; without an art market there would be no galleries and art fairs; without galleries and fairs the artists could not create, show and sell their work. Effectively, without private collectors there would be no art.

Underlying the view that collectors and the art market are the key benefactors for the arts is that there is no other alternative. The cultural theorist Mark Fisher famously described this condition as ‘Capitalist Realism’, where people are persuaded to believe that there is no alternative to capitalism and neoliberalism. It is no coincidence that over the past two decades, commercial art galleries and art fairs have been pivotal for discourse, publications, curatorial opportunities, grants and art production.

The specific intersection we find ourselves at in the private museum landscape of India, and the world over, is one in which neoliberal corporatisation meets with neo-feudalism—a “Feudo-Capitalism”. It is directly linked to individuals (and families) owning enormous assets, especially in real-estate and other kinds of property holdings that are purposed as infrastructure for the public.

At a global level, the political economist Michel Lub Bellemare has compiled 15 years of research on what he describes as a rise of “Techno-Feudalist-Capitalism”. More recently, the economist Yanis Varoufakis has written about “Techno-Feudalism”, identifying a new economic model where big-tech entrepreneurs own entire platforms and cloud servers that become “public squares”. It’s not what you consume, but where you consume, and whether you have any choice in the latter. In the context of private museums and foundations run by single individuals or a family, this offers a clue into what lies underneath the widespread consensus that there is no alternative to the private museum. What appears as the only realistic choice that the field has for sustaining, also becomes an altruistic act on the part of a benefactor.

Keeping Things Private

What then does it mean for privately run museums, foundations and institutions to be open to the public? A majority of them imply that their doors are open to visitors, and the idea of a public is merely one of an audience. Open to accountability, whether to the public, to the staff, or to the art community is out of the question. And why would it be any other way, when the raison d’être for the private museum is a favour being done to society? In a Feudo-Capitalist fantasy, patronage can very quickly become patronising.

Where does such a belief come from, and how does it get legitimised? For one, a non-profit status in the arts seems automatically to morally elevate a person or entity away from the necessary evil that is the art market. According to Feudo-Capitalism, art operates along a two-dimensional graph where the art market is on one axis, and philanthropy on the other. Based on this diagram, art belongs somewhere along a vertical and horizontal axis (you decide which one is which), of being a luxury commodity and a charitable cause. We know that art markets are always finding ways to reduce complex practices into simplistic commodities, best exemplified in art fairs.

But since when did contemporary art also turn into a charitable cause that requires support without which it would die? In the 19th and 20th centuries, journalism, academia, activism, and the arts, have all been hallmarks of independent thought. They have tested new ideas, formed new vocabularies and offered new imaginations for social and political life.

The inception of non-government organisations (NGOs) and non-profits was a way to advance independent thought, protecting it from instrumentalisation in the hands of government as well as corporate interests. With policies that offer tax wavers and make Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) mandatory on large businesses, the non-profit becomes a fixed deposit.

In India, there are examples of private art museums that opened to the public, supported contemporary art, and closed down. Subsequently works from those collections return to the market, reified in their importance by virtue of having been connected to a museum. One is tempted then to regard the private museum as no different from an investment, except the returns are measured on an extended timeline as opposed to the immediate returns on short-term, high-risk investments.

This applies just as well to privately owned museums and foundations elsewhere in the world. The protracted return of investment (ROI) for private museums can be a couple of generations, but it is still a private asset accruing enormous value, that can be withdrawn from public view at will with no accountability.

We have not even touched on the symbolic capital that is accrued by patrons as they get invited on international museum boards and committees, with access to exclusive collector’s circles and so on. The art historian Santhosh Sadanandan observed the rise of this phenomena in the 2007 essay Perhaps (nothing is) Beyond Credos. Drawing from theories of the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, he notes that art’s “transactions are defined by an aversion to the ‘commercial’; it conceals from itself and others the interest at stake in its practice and establishes the means of deriving profit from disinterestedness… its effectiveness is defined by its ability to conceal its capital interest (the profit) and converts it into the symbolic capital”.

When it comes to privately owned non-profits, there is a similar morality at work. A pattern of promotional exploitation becomes widespread on the pretext of limited funds. Artists are often asked to take less or no fee because of the promotion they will receive. The curator and researcher in turn become administrators of the enterprise, providing it critical legitimacy, at best with the promise to change the system from within, and at worst to be made to feel party to a system with no place for questioning as they have been coerced into it. Luis’s recent post short-circuited this loop. It opened the doors for the public, the staff, and the artistic community to lay a claim on the private museum, ask questions of it, and ask for accountability, as a museum truly open to the public.

Becoming Public

Between 1970-1971, the magazine Vrishchik founded and edited by the artists Gulammohammed Sheikh and Bhupen Khakhar ran a series of issues dedicated to artists protesting against the Lalit Kala Akademi (The National Art Academy) and the India Triennale. The magazine became the forum for debates and letters, both for and against the public institution. Many of the protest meetings took place inside institution’s premise. Many artists voicing their thoughts are today among the most celebrated names and their works are in public and private collections around the world. For a moment, what if we were to imagine that the ongoing discussion around KNMA’s controversy could also take place inside the museum, as part of the museum’s ethos rather than a scandal that threatens the museum’s image?

In her book Museums and Wealth: The Politics of Contemporary Art Collections (2022), Nizan Shaked offers insights into the fault-lines of the public-private museum. She points out that several museums around the world are private from a legal perspective, but can be regarded as public because they are subsidised by the government and can therefore be made publicly accountable, as it is the tax payers money enabling their subsidy.

Private museums, trusts and organisations in India established under Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) laws are essentially running on the profits of companies that would have been taxable, but are channelled towards public benefit. Here too, the public can claim a right. The controversy surrounding the KNMA started from such a claim, to talk about a public exhibition hosted by a public institution—the National Gallery of Modern Art. The ensuing debate is a testament to the public life of all museums. It is also a testament to the public life of art, which is not based on loyalty to benefactors, but to keep alive the difficult question of what is valuable to society.

It can be argued that the public discourse of contemporary art in India has gradually narrowed in recent years, despite the boom in the art market, the rise of galleries, fairs, museums and biennials. The wider public perception regards art as a luxury industry, accounting for why most newspaper coverage on art is about auction records. Universities tend to bracket the diversity of the art field within the homogeneity of the art market, maintaining a critical distance from both.

The art market tries to maintain that art belongs to a niche section of society. Despite all its good intentions, the KNMA seems to have fallen victim to this fallow understanding of the narrowing perception of art, while the art field on the other hand, is churning as a site for production, experimentation, discussion and refuge. The present unrest in the past month seems to be asking, what is the public life of art that the artworld aspires to have? And, what is idea of ‘public’ that we wish to keep alive when we think of an institution open to public?

Museums are public institutions that emerge from a long history of social and political convulsions. Debates about what is of value to society go hand in hand with who gets to decide. This includes public discourse in the press about what should or should not be collected and shown in public museums. When something is done for the public good, expect there to be a public debate about whether the public finds it in its interest or not.

For museums receiving public subsidy, that question becomes all the more pressing as it is the tax payer’s money. For any private collector or organisation that wants to become a museum, they are not entering a history of becoming glorious. They are entering a history of becoming public, and the upheavals that come with it. A museum is a site of convulsions.

In writing a critical text about Jan Shakti, Sandip and subsequently the signatories of the campaign have in fact conferred upon the private museum a recognition of a public institution. This recognition comes because of the hard work and the intellectual and affective labour of several people who have built the museum since its inception.

Imagine if a commercial gallery in Delhi suddenly rebranded itself as a museum, would the field take it seriously? No. It takes years of hard work for a private entity to be regarded as a museum, and this in turn brings with it a set of responsibilities. The question now is, can the Kiran Nadar Museum of Art, or any private museum and foundation for that matter, stand up to what it claims to be: open to the public? While we should expect a private museum that claims to be open to the public to also be answerable to its public, I do not consider them as a solution to all the problems outlined in this text. A space for independent, critical and exploratory thinking is the least that the field expects from art spaces. A public private institution has that potential, to nurture the public life of art.

Art Market to be held at Kentucky Museum this Saturday

Art Market to be held at Kentucky Museum this Saturday

College Heights Foundation celebrates Centennial

Jul 17th, 2023

On July 17, the College Heights Foundation at Western Kentucky University hosted a Centennial Celebration in recognition of its 100th anniversary. CHF was originally organized and incorporated in the Commonwealth of Kentucky on July 17, 1923.

WKU Housing & Residence Life Assistant Director Wins StarRez PortalX Competition

Jul 17th, 2023

Doug Tate, WKU Housing & Residence Life Assistant Director of Housing Administration, won the StarRez PortalX Competition at the StarRez Global Connect Conference in Baltimore, Maryland, held July 8-11, 2023.The conference hosted nearly 950 participants.

WKU YMLA Earns Honors at Educators Rising National Conference

Jul 5th, 2023

“In this program, students are exposed to topics such as communication, leadership, team-building, and public speaking skills with a great emphasis on teaching as a way to motivate students into the education profession.”

The Metropolitan Museum of Art and Verizon launch new AR app experience, Replica

The Metropolitan Museum of Art and Verizon launch new AR app experience, Replica

NEW YORK – The Metropolitan Museum of Art and Verizon have launched a first-of-its-kind experience at the Museum, Replica, that allows visitors at The Met to scan artwork and bring elements of the works digitally into the global immersive platform Roblox through augmented reality (AR).

Beginning August 2, users can download the Replica app, and starting August 3, visitors to The Met can access the in-app map to guide them to artworks around the Museum, learn about different works of art, and digitally collect unique pieces for free—like a Japanese suit of armor from early 14th–early 15th century or Vincent van Gogh’s straw hat from his iconic Self-Portrait of 1887—for their Roblox avatar.

Each wearable piece in Replica was inspired by art from across The Met’s vast collection of 1.5 million objects; the 37 selected artworks are drawn from objects on view across more than 30 galleries spanning nine curatorial areas, including the American Wing, Egyptian Art, European Paintings, and Asian Art. Highlights include Van Gogh’s Self-Portrait with a Straw Hat (1887); Statuette of Anubis (332–30 B.C.); Perseus with the Head of Medusa (1804–6); Prince Holding a Falcon (ca. 1820); Marble capital and finial in the form of a Sphinx (ca. 530 B.C.); Reaching Jaguar (1906–7; cast 1926); Vase with Rabbits (late 16th century); Helmet (Zukinnari Kabuto) (16th century); and Armor of Henry II, King of France (ca. 1555).

The Replica app can be downloaded for free on iOS and Android devices.

“This groundbreaking app brings artwork from The Met’s illustrious collection into the virtual realm of Roblox, transforming the way visitors engage with art and crafting a captivating, fun, and truly unique journey through the Museum,” said Max Hollein, The Met’s Marina Kellen French Director and CEO. “Replica is a testament to The Met’s ambitious exploration of educational initiatives that inspire playful connections with art in the Museum as well as in the digital realm.”

“In partnership with The Met, we created Replica as an experience to connect people to art in a new and culturally relevant way,” said Kristin McHugh, SVP of Marketing and Creative at Verizon. “From The Met Unframed to this exciting launch of Replica, our technology can help bridge gaming and art, creating new possibilities for art education.”

Once inside the app, visitors can follow fun and accessible clues that appear on the digital map, leading to various galleries and works throughout the Museum. After the artworks are scanned in real life, each object is transformed into a collectible replica and can be transferred to the Roblox platform. These objects will then appear in the user’s inventory for their avatar to use as items and accessories.

On Roblox, users can experience a virtual version of The Met’s iconic facade on New York City’s Fifth Avenue and other renowned spaces, like the Great Hall and Great Hall staircase. Each Replica item is accompanied by information and details about the object and its history. Users are invited to create pairings of items and feature their selections in museum-style display cases—which can then be upvoted—and to snap pictures in four photo booth spaces inspired by The Met’s collections of art from ancient Greece, Rome, and Egypt, as well as European Paintings and the beloved print The Great Wave (ca. 1830–32) by Japanese artist Katsushika Hokusai.

Created and designed by the multidisciplinary company UNIT9 and Verizon in partnership with Roblox, the strategy and production company Ode to Joy, and The Met, whose digital, educational, and curatorial teams provided rich content and expertise, Replica was built as a user-friendly and engaging experience for children and young adults. The app features strong visuals, clues, and short, digestible educational moments to help users along their journey. In an impressive feat of 3D geometry, the Roblox experience contains a Met-inspired virtual version of the Museum itself, where users can explore the Museum in their newly acquired avatar items. Users can find these items in perpetuity in their Roblox inventory, bringing their favorite Met pieces wherever they go.

Replica will be featured on The Met’s website as well as on social media using the hashtag #TheMetReplica.

About The Metropolitan Museum of Art

The Met presents art from around the world and across time for everyone to experience and enjoy. The Museum lives in two iconic sites in New York City—The Met Fifth Avenue and The Met Cloisters. Millions of people also take part in The Met experience online. Since it was founded in 1870, The Met has always aspired to be more than a treasury of rare and beautiful objects. Every day, art comes alive in the Museum’s galleries and through its exhibitions and events, revealing both new ideas and unexpected connections across time and across cultures.