DOWNTICKS: THE DAMIEN DULDRUMS: WHEN IS ENOUGH ENOUGH?
As evidence that there can be no strictly linear movement up in the art market without regard to quality and consistency, there has been a marked downturn and backing off with regard to Damien Hirst's auction performance in 2001. Though his last extravaganza at New York's Gagosian Gallery (Fall, 2000) sold out and was an unmitigated raging success, there has begun to settle in a re-evaluation of the value of Hirst's artistic output in all forms, i.e. paintings, sculptures, prints and multiples.
THE SECRET EDITIONS
In effect much if not all of Hirst's recent output has been the result of endless reiteration of a few ideas first put fourth in the early stages of his career nearly a decade ago. The obvious nature of this stratagem is the bottomless pit of spot and spin paintings that ceaselessly flow from Hirst Incorporated. Together, these works form a kind of non-authored aggregation that until now has continuously fed the hungry masses of collectors and institutions hankering to have a scrap of the Hirst enterprise to proudly showcase on their mantelpiece. The spots are offspring of early Bridget Riley paintings from the 1960's, augmented by titles that refer to pharmaceuticals, produced ad infinitum; and the spins, a simple Richter-esque formula with no discernable conceptual import. All in all, these bodies of works (two simplistic "ideas") amount to naked marketing panache. And guess what, the collecting world has begun to take notice as reflected by the fact that on many occasions no paddles were raised at the last round of auctions in New York and London when these works appeared. A humorous footnote to the machinations of the creation of these paintings, Christies tried to distinguish one of the endlessly repetitive spots by stating in its catalogue that Hirst had a hand in actually applying the paint to one of the early ones himself. Wow, what a reassuring signifier of value that a painting was allegedly touched by the author (which painting did not sell by the way).
THE MUTATING SCULPTURES
Like binary fission, Hirst's sculptures split off into reincarnations of themselves, sometimes a fact made clear to the public at large, and sometimes a deception hidden from full view: caveat emptor-let the buyer beware. An example is the flayed skeleton sculpture resting on a glass cross with floating Ping-Pong balls suspended from the eyesockets. In the Spring of2000 this work first appeared in London's White Cube Gallery's grand opening in Hoxton Square under the name "Rehab is for Quitters" (can't take anything away from Hirst's occasional brilliant wordplay), which sold in the vicinity of $275,000. In the fall of the same year in New York, the work appeared under the guise of a different name with no allusion to the fact that this was an exact replica of a previously created sculpture. An early 1990's medicine cabinet readymade, no different from a Hiam Steinbach, and Koonsian in spirit, failed to elicit a single bid in New York in the Spring of 2001 with a $600,000-800,000 estimate. Ten years later, Hirst is still shopping away in medical supply catalogues doing a great impersonation of himself. Great work for as long as you can get away with it. Further examples, and they are legion, are two gynecological offices submerged in water with fish (as stated in Hirst's own words to refer to woman who "smell like kippers") called "Love Lost", and "Lost Love", one with small fish, and one with larger fish. And, separated by four years from his last one person show in New York, two floating ball sculptures, one just a beach ball suspended by a jet of air (1996), and another ball similarly suspended but in the later work over knife blades. Could the life of excessive indulgence (rumors of rampant boorish behavior at the recent Venice Biennale ) be the result of guilt , and self-doubt over continuing to bamboozle the art world? Stay tuned.
UPTICKS: KAREN KILIMNIK HASN'T SCRAPED THE TOP
In the early 1990's Karen Kilimnik was a leading light of the movement known as scatter art which entailed the strategic placement of found stuff, crafted objects and assorted flotsam spread about the floor in a sculptural arrangement akin to a Carl Andre with a degree of three dimensional kitsch. When hard economics times hit in the early nineties, one suspects that Kilimnik's dealer, the 303 Gallery in NYC, had a hand in the gradual transmogrification in the body of work from these loose, barely confinable aggregations to paintings and works on paper. Though any time factors impacting on the work of an artist wrought from without may seem problematic, the work of Kilimnik has progressed into some of the most effecting, original two-dimension art currently being produced. This is especially apparent when taken into consideration with some of the outlandish prices for the works of her contemporaries such as Cecily Brown (over $100,000), Elizabeth Peyton (over $75,000), John Currin (nearly $350,000) and Chris Offili (over $300,000). In relation to the previously mentioned group of Kilimnik's contemporaries (all younger artists by the way), her work is downright undervalued. Recent auction performance for Kilimnik's drawings are in the neighborhood of $10,000 and oftentimes lower, and a record of $27,500 for a painting dating from 1996 (Spring 2001, Sotheby's day sale). Her work has yet to crack the evening sales of a major auction. The paper works often juxtaposes imagery and text with colored pencils and painted bits, detailing the worlds of fashion and celebrity in a mode not seen in others who tread upon this albeit familiar territory. The works on paper are in a language so distinct to the artist that one can imagine a scenario where these will be more favorably viewed over time than the paintings. In Kilimnik's hands, these themes become infused with a mannered romanticism, light and airy in the drawings, as the sculptures once were diffused on the floor, and lushly painted when applied to canvas. Kilimnik is transfixed by the ballet in an almost nostalgic longing for active participation in the realm of dance that has infatuated so many previous artists. In the end, the works of Kilimnik are like little gems (always small in scale, physically) with the paint luxuriantly applied, the text quirkily distinct, and prices that have not yet come close to approaching the top of their inherent value.
PERSONAL PICKS: IN THE DOMAIN OF THE UNKNOWN-ACCONCI STUDIOS
Vito Acconci seems to have found the secret of life transcending the everyday woes that drive the rest of the world at large, namely, the ubiquitous quest for prosperity that has recently spurred global acts of civil disobedience and violence. From his beginnings as a poet and early conceptualist in the 1960's, mercilessly exploring his body in his photo-based text pieces and performance work, Acconci has consciously cultivated a position outside the mainstream mechanations of the artworld. He famously lives a life of extreme asceticism without so much as a nod to the throes of conspicuous consumption that rule so many of our lives. His outfit is a regimen of black shirt and trousers, never varying from one year to another, yet from day to day. His studio is a threadbare office with gunmetal gray metal shelving units that could furnish the set for a 1950's accounting firm. Though he has worked with Barbara Gladstone Gallery for some years, among the most elitist venues in New York, his body of work has grown steadily unwieldy progressing from 2-D and video, to large-scale installations, to giant outdoor public works to the most uncontainable of art forms: architecture.
To date, Acconci has built architectural elements such as the futuristic walkway and entrance to a subway station in Shibuyu, Japan (2000) and a slowly turning ring set within an administative building courtyard in Munich, Germany, powered bya wind turbine atop the office tower. Such gyrations in the body of work of an "artist" are considered tomfoolery, or worse, career self-destruction. And, the extant pieces of Acconci popping up at recent auctions have been no exception to the inelasticity of the artworld when it comes to marked shifting in art making practice. A model for an outdoor work, a giant clam shell sculpture fetched all of $1,500 in the Spring 2001 auctions at Phillips. A fencing-mask festooned with video cameras as eyes and mini monitors to observe the din of life from a protected stance was for sale for $35,000 at Barbara Gladstone's summer 2001 group show. The early panel pieces from the late 1960's through the 70's, comprised of a photographic element and a text component, can be had generally for $5,000 to $15,000 at any given auction. Adivce: buy anything you can from this seminal master of the contemporary who only suffers from being too far ahead of his time with his quest for intellectual pursuit and experimentation at the expense of material and societal success.
Towards my unfettered belief in the ideas generated by Acconci Studio, I have commissioned Acconci and his band of disenfranchised young architects to design a permanent gallery space in New York's Chelsea, and while that project is being built, a temporary public exhibition space in the West Village, as well. The premise was to use Frederick Kiesler's design of Peggy Guggenheim's Art of This Century Gallery (from 1942) as a point of departure-to readdress the paradigm of the white cube as the monolithic, only viable model within which to show art. The results by team Acconci were as loopy as one would imagine: the void of the cube is to be filled with a giant, all encompassing, polycarbonate blob floating in the space like a slightly hovering blimp... There are no walls, when paintings need to be hung apparatuses appear from hidden structures in the columns like accordians. The biomorphic mass seduces people into the space where the facade is left purposefully open to blur the distinction between outside and inside. Clear your minds, withhold judgement: a new archetype is upon us to display and disseminate contemporary art and hopefully, just maybe, things will never be the same.
Friday, June 16, 2000
Tuesday, March 21, 2000
PAUL THEK: FAMOUS... & FORGOTTEN... & FAMOUS (POLIESTER Magazine, Spring 2000)
Pain, death and not being able to make art again. Have you ever stumbled across a medical television station in the middle of invasive surgery? Clamps hold open a stomach, a surgeons' hands extend deep into the body, and blood and guts are revealed like a cross-section of a sedimentary rock. At first glance the impulse is to shy away and zap to a new channel, then morbid curiosity takes hold and repulsion fades to seduction. We can't help but look on. What is put into question is our smug sense of well being, which is normally taken for granted, as opposed to thoughts of the ravages of disease and decay.
Such is the territory of but a fragment of the varied work of Paul Thek, an American born artist that lived from 1933-1988. What is referred to above specifically relates to the "Technological Reliquaries" series of Thek, from 1964-67, and "The Tomb" from 1967. The "Technological Reliquaries" are sculptural replications of meat, or flesh in all of its disturbing rawness, flawlessly crafted out of wax and pigment. These slabs of beef (human or otherwise) are encased in minimalist glass vitrines sometimes printed with yellow lines, which can be seen as either forever holding the viewer outside, or drawing them closer to the object that lies within, imprisoned.
We are a global society big on denial, bent on immediate gratification, and skilled at tweaking appearances at the expense of just about everything else. Mortality is not something we relish contemplating, especially in relation to habits such as drinking, smoking, drugs and over-indulgence with food. It is hard to continually keep in mind what lies beneath the surface and how precarious health and wellness are in light of disease, preventable or not. Constantly undergoing oxidation, aging and drawing closer to death, our actual state of existence is not highly revered by a society fixated on youth or just looking youthful. Thek's meat pieces invoke human rot, tumors, cancer--just about every person's worst fears and vulnerabilities. Yet, simultaneously, these works manage to be about life and beauty and preservation of the human condition. Thek's meat sculptures, created in the mid-60's, presage most end of the century movements in post-modern, conceptual art practice, from institutional critique to spirituality.
The title of the series "Technological Reliquaries" referenced Thek's notion that increasing reliance on technology was encroaching upon our capacity to live humanely, compassionately, and with passion. Thek foresaw so clearly and early the steamrollering obsolescence of humans by clinical systems of knowledge, and evidenced this foreboding by encasing reproductions of human flesh in glass showcases akin to museum relics. Like the investigations of an archaeologist, Thek's reliquaries preserved what appeared to be animal or human tissue as an emblem of something that once was.
Thek was a devout Catholic, more or less, and seamlessly wove his religious beliefs into every facet of his work. Sins of the flesh, an allusion to breaking the ban on fornication, is recalled viewing Thek's meat works, suggesting a religious device used in order to scare people from inappropriately getting a piece of... In addition, carnal knowledge is implied as it relates to messy, fleshy sex, and how hot bodies are compared to scraps of beef. Like Duchamp, Thek was a master punster, and was never above playing wag to the art world, which has always taken itself too seriously.
When Thek chose to adhere three images of Ringo Star to a small meat sculpture in 1967, it was not as a gesture of cynical commentary on minor celebrity, but rather, an identification with those relegated to be perennially on the peripheral: in effect, inside outsiders. A similar nod was made when Thek included a photographic reproduction of Harpo Marx in an installation, which he referred to as "Harpo Marxism", his version of comic communism for the disenfranchised (Quoted by Susanne Delahanty in her catalogue "Paul Thek/Processions", Philadelphia: Institute of Contemporary Art, University of Pennsylvania, 1977).
In all the enigma that is the work of Matthew Barney, through all the Hollywood-style prosthetics that allegedly obscure the identity of the artist; the chiseled body, and fashion model good looks of Barney always manage to shine. In contrast, the meat pieces of Thek, sometimes adorned with clumps of the artist's own hair, stand in as anti-portraits, against the natural inclination to present one's self in the best, most appealing possible light. Versus the ancient Greek ideal of the male form as body-beautiful, Thek has turned this notion (and his body) inside-out, making the private public in a highly diffident manner.
The ready-made, salacious look of a Thek meat sculpture belied the puritanical, Judeo-Christian work ethic invested in the adherence to academic, old world art making skills. Thek was a master draftsman and craftsman and equally adept at concealing this fact. It was never fathomable that in all the reams of press and heaps of accolades on Damien Hirst and his scandalous cow pieces that nary a connection was made to Thek and his "Technological Reliquaries" that preceded Hirst by almost thirty years. However, this was made understandable by the fact that until the end of 1999, Thek never had an exhibit in the UK (despite a rare inclusion in a group show). Unlike the entrepreneurial Hirst, who in endlessly repeating himself has shown to be more proficient at making money than making art, Thek consciously halted the meat pieces after receiving a measure of success and notoriety early on in his career. In fact, having lived a large portion of his life abroad, mostly in Europe, scarcely any US institutions owned Thek's work at the time of his death.
"The Tomb" was a prescient installation created in 1967 which consisted of a pink wooden form in the shape of a ziggurat, and within, a laid out wax cast of a dead Thek, with outstretched tongue and mangled, fingerless hand. The artist was rendered a grotesque impotent symbol of the maceration of mankind. Again, rather than create an heroic version of the self, Thek instead chose to depict himself as a crippled soul that suffered some kind of ritualistic sacrifice. Perhaps Thek was signifying the consecration of the artist by offering himself to the deity as propitiation, in light of the alienating onslaught of pop and minimalism, signaled by the color and form of the tomb. Characteristic of Thek and how he viewed himself and his work; that this sculpture got tagged "The Death of a Hippie" due to the long hair and ragged appearance of the figure, which Thek considered a misreading, caused him to abandon the piece by way of unpaid storage fees.
Robert Gober placed a hairy leg fragment against a wall, sometimes with a burning candle situated on top, commenting upon the fragility of mankind in the face of rampant disease. Yet, in view of Thek, such gesture seems overly aestheticized even in its passing nod to things undeserved and inequitable such as AIDS. Unlike Gober, Thek never matched his initial early art world success after the "Technological Reliquaries" which tormented him, left him bitter, penniless and unsure of himself at the time of his death. Sometimes, being too good is too bad.
Such is the territory of but a fragment of the varied work of Paul Thek, an American born artist that lived from 1933-1988. What is referred to above specifically relates to the "Technological Reliquaries" series of Thek, from 1964-67, and "The Tomb" from 1967. The "Technological Reliquaries" are sculptural replications of meat, or flesh in all of its disturbing rawness, flawlessly crafted out of wax and pigment. These slabs of beef (human or otherwise) are encased in minimalist glass vitrines sometimes printed with yellow lines, which can be seen as either forever holding the viewer outside, or drawing them closer to the object that lies within, imprisoned.
We are a global society big on denial, bent on immediate gratification, and skilled at tweaking appearances at the expense of just about everything else. Mortality is not something we relish contemplating, especially in relation to habits such as drinking, smoking, drugs and over-indulgence with food. It is hard to continually keep in mind what lies beneath the surface and how precarious health and wellness are in light of disease, preventable or not. Constantly undergoing oxidation, aging and drawing closer to death, our actual state of existence is not highly revered by a society fixated on youth or just looking youthful. Thek's meat pieces invoke human rot, tumors, cancer--just about every person's worst fears and vulnerabilities. Yet, simultaneously, these works manage to be about life and beauty and preservation of the human condition. Thek's meat sculptures, created in the mid-60's, presage most end of the century movements in post-modern, conceptual art practice, from institutional critique to spirituality.
The title of the series "Technological Reliquaries" referenced Thek's notion that increasing reliance on technology was encroaching upon our capacity to live humanely, compassionately, and with passion. Thek foresaw so clearly and early the steamrollering obsolescence of humans by clinical systems of knowledge, and evidenced this foreboding by encasing reproductions of human flesh in glass showcases akin to museum relics. Like the investigations of an archaeologist, Thek's reliquaries preserved what appeared to be animal or human tissue as an emblem of something that once was.
Thek was a devout Catholic, more or less, and seamlessly wove his religious beliefs into every facet of his work. Sins of the flesh, an allusion to breaking the ban on fornication, is recalled viewing Thek's meat works, suggesting a religious device used in order to scare people from inappropriately getting a piece of... In addition, carnal knowledge is implied as it relates to messy, fleshy sex, and how hot bodies are compared to scraps of beef. Like Duchamp, Thek was a master punster, and was never above playing wag to the art world, which has always taken itself too seriously.
When Thek chose to adhere three images of Ringo Star to a small meat sculpture in 1967, it was not as a gesture of cynical commentary on minor celebrity, but rather, an identification with those relegated to be perennially on the peripheral: in effect, inside outsiders. A similar nod was made when Thek included a photographic reproduction of Harpo Marx in an installation, which he referred to as "Harpo Marxism", his version of comic communism for the disenfranchised (Quoted by Susanne Delahanty in her catalogue "Paul Thek/Processions", Philadelphia: Institute of Contemporary Art, University of Pennsylvania, 1977).
In all the enigma that is the work of Matthew Barney, through all the Hollywood-style prosthetics that allegedly obscure the identity of the artist; the chiseled body, and fashion model good looks of Barney always manage to shine. In contrast, the meat pieces of Thek, sometimes adorned with clumps of the artist's own hair, stand in as anti-portraits, against the natural inclination to present one's self in the best, most appealing possible light. Versus the ancient Greek ideal of the male form as body-beautiful, Thek has turned this notion (and his body) inside-out, making the private public in a highly diffident manner.
The ready-made, salacious look of a Thek meat sculpture belied the puritanical, Judeo-Christian work ethic invested in the adherence to academic, old world art making skills. Thek was a master draftsman and craftsman and equally adept at concealing this fact. It was never fathomable that in all the reams of press and heaps of accolades on Damien Hirst and his scandalous cow pieces that nary a connection was made to Thek and his "Technological Reliquaries" that preceded Hirst by almost thirty years. However, this was made understandable by the fact that until the end of 1999, Thek never had an exhibit in the UK (despite a rare inclusion in a group show). Unlike the entrepreneurial Hirst, who in endlessly repeating himself has shown to be more proficient at making money than making art, Thek consciously halted the meat pieces after receiving a measure of success and notoriety early on in his career. In fact, having lived a large portion of his life abroad, mostly in Europe, scarcely any US institutions owned Thek's work at the time of his death.
"The Tomb" was a prescient installation created in 1967 which consisted of a pink wooden form in the shape of a ziggurat, and within, a laid out wax cast of a dead Thek, with outstretched tongue and mangled, fingerless hand. The artist was rendered a grotesque impotent symbol of the maceration of mankind. Again, rather than create an heroic version of the self, Thek instead chose to depict himself as a crippled soul that suffered some kind of ritualistic sacrifice. Perhaps Thek was signifying the consecration of the artist by offering himself to the deity as propitiation, in light of the alienating onslaught of pop and minimalism, signaled by the color and form of the tomb. Characteristic of Thek and how he viewed himself and his work; that this sculpture got tagged "The Death of a Hippie" due to the long hair and ragged appearance of the figure, which Thek considered a misreading, caused him to abandon the piece by way of unpaid storage fees.
Robert Gober placed a hairy leg fragment against a wall, sometimes with a burning candle situated on top, commenting upon the fragility of mankind in the face of rampant disease. Yet, in view of Thek, such gesture seems overly aestheticized even in its passing nod to things undeserved and inequitable such as AIDS. Unlike Gober, Thek never matched his initial early art world success after the "Technological Reliquaries" which tormented him, left him bitter, penniless and unsure of himself at the time of his death. Sometimes, being too good is too bad.
Sunday, January 16, 2000
ARTinvestor Magazine - BOTTINO; :BOT; GLASS, 1 - 2000
BOTTINO; :BOT; GLASS
From 1986 to the summer of 1999 Borocco Restaurant (below Canal on West Broadway) was a favorite art world hang out in the heyday of the Mary Boone-Schnabel-Fischl-Salle-Basquiat, rein of power. A time forever, memorably etched upon the minds of those that caught a taste of the opulence and chest-pounding heroics of it all. Signifying the premature optimism of the Miami scene in general in the mid- to late 1990's, in-between his first two NY projects, owner Danny Emerman opened a Borocco Beach for three years in Florida before he folded it. When the art world picked up and retrenched in Chelsea, so did the venerable eating establishment under the new guise, Bottino (opened for business in June of 1998). The food at Bottino on 10th Avenue, between 24th and 25th streets, is as consistent as the décor is subdued 1950's style simplicity. The restaurant is a kind of up-scale art world cafeteria, where you can be sure to find anyone and everyone of significance from the self-important, to the important-important.
On the other hand, a cutting edge architectural leap is manifest in the just opened :bot Restaurant on Mott Street (south of Prince Street, near Little Italy) and Glass bar (due to open in early March, located across the street from Bottino on 10th Avenue and co-owned by Fernando Henao). Architect Thomas Leeser, a German based in New York, who also designed the Grunert/Gasser Gallery in Chelsea, designed both places. His style, as apparent from the latest two projects of restaurateur and bar entrepreneur Emerman, is tubular-techno, if that can used to characterize an environment. Four by eight-foot sheet-rock, the building block of wall construction in the States, was soaked in vats of water to render it pliable enough to be molded into the curvilinear walls that make up the new spaces. Tinted glass was handily used to create a fresh, contemporary ambience, with a hint of 60's nostalgia; when the spaces are taken as a whole, they are akin to high tech Japanese subway cars. Glass being a bar is more palatable as an architectural exercise in innovation than the results of :bot, which, with its lime green walls and pink and orange accents, is almost disturbing at first. Though the meal was delicious and without complaints, the space is actually located outside with a tent-like cover and glowing heaters dropped from the ceiling above each table, which is as disconcerting as the colors. All in all, it's a good place to show friends with an architectural bent and a strong stomach, that are into disquieting day-glo-otherwise, to Bottino and pop over to Glass for an after dinner drink.
Danny Emerman, owner of Bottino, Bot and Glass, could be the first restaurateur that built a business around the art world that didn't sell paintings or build crates. Perhaps there was a bit of luck or a confluence of events that catapulted his Borocco to art world hyper status. Nevertheless, he consciously went after the art crowd with his move to Chelsea and deserves the position of court holder for the art elite.
Bottino: 246 10th Avenue (between 24th and 25th Streets). Hours: Tues. to Sat. lunch 12:00 - 3:30pm, Dinner: Tues. - Sat. 6:00 to 11:30; Monday 6:00 - 11:00, and Sunday 6:00 - 11:00. Telephone 212 206-6766; fax 212 206-6767, web: www.Bottinonyc.com
Bot: 231 Mott Street, Monday - Saturday 6:00 - 11:30. Phone and fax 646 613-1312. Web www.botmott.com Glass: 287 10th Avenue, 5:00pm - 3:00am, only cold food-light fare and appetizers such as cerviche and sashimi. No phone numbers since not open till March Specialties at the above: appetizer tuna tartre; penne with speck; and rack of lamb Thomas Leeser is from Frankfurt, and his information re: his building projects could be accessed at www.leeser.com. Please note he also designed Bottino.
From 1986 to the summer of 1999 Borocco Restaurant (below Canal on West Broadway) was a favorite art world hang out in the heyday of the Mary Boone-Schnabel-Fischl-Salle-Basquiat, rein of power. A time forever, memorably etched upon the minds of those that caught a taste of the opulence and chest-pounding heroics of it all. Signifying the premature optimism of the Miami scene in general in the mid- to late 1990's, in-between his first two NY projects, owner Danny Emerman opened a Borocco Beach for three years in Florida before he folded it. When the art world picked up and retrenched in Chelsea, so did the venerable eating establishment under the new guise, Bottino (opened for business in June of 1998). The food at Bottino on 10th Avenue, between 24th and 25th streets, is as consistent as the décor is subdued 1950's style simplicity. The restaurant is a kind of up-scale art world cafeteria, where you can be sure to find anyone and everyone of significance from the self-important, to the important-important.
On the other hand, a cutting edge architectural leap is manifest in the just opened :bot Restaurant on Mott Street (south of Prince Street, near Little Italy) and Glass bar (due to open in early March, located across the street from Bottino on 10th Avenue and co-owned by Fernando Henao). Architect Thomas Leeser, a German based in New York, who also designed the Grunert/Gasser Gallery in Chelsea, designed both places. His style, as apparent from the latest two projects of restaurateur and bar entrepreneur Emerman, is tubular-techno, if that can used to characterize an environment. Four by eight-foot sheet-rock, the building block of wall construction in the States, was soaked in vats of water to render it pliable enough to be molded into the curvilinear walls that make up the new spaces. Tinted glass was handily used to create a fresh, contemporary ambience, with a hint of 60's nostalgia; when the spaces are taken as a whole, they are akin to high tech Japanese subway cars. Glass being a bar is more palatable as an architectural exercise in innovation than the results of :bot, which, with its lime green walls and pink and orange accents, is almost disturbing at first. Though the meal was delicious and without complaints, the space is actually located outside with a tent-like cover and glowing heaters dropped from the ceiling above each table, which is as disconcerting as the colors. All in all, it's a good place to show friends with an architectural bent and a strong stomach, that are into disquieting day-glo-otherwise, to Bottino and pop over to Glass for an after dinner drink.
Danny Emerman, owner of Bottino, Bot and Glass, could be the first restaurateur that built a business around the art world that didn't sell paintings or build crates. Perhaps there was a bit of luck or a confluence of events that catapulted his Borocco to art world hyper status. Nevertheless, he consciously went after the art crowd with his move to Chelsea and deserves the position of court holder for the art elite.
Bottino: 246 10th Avenue (between 24th and 25th Streets). Hours: Tues. to Sat. lunch 12:00 - 3:30pm, Dinner: Tues. - Sat. 6:00 to 11:30; Monday 6:00 - 11:00, and Sunday 6:00 - 11:00. Telephone 212 206-6766; fax 212 206-6767, web: www.Bottinonyc.com
Bot: 231 Mott Street, Monday - Saturday 6:00 - 11:30. Phone and fax 646 613-1312. Web www.botmott.com Glass: 287 10th Avenue, 5:00pm - 3:00am, only cold food-light fare and appetizers such as cerviche and sashimi. No phone numbers since not open till March Specialties at the above: appetizer tuna tartre; penne with speck; and rack of lamb Thomas Leeser is from Frankfurt, and his information re: his building projects could be accessed at www.leeser.com. Please note he also designed Bottino.
ARTinvestor Magazine - TRENDS, 1 - 2000
TRENDS IN THE DAY SALES OF SOTHEBY'S, CHRISTIE'S AND PHILLIPS
Phillips was tepid at best and at worst, a dangerous place to go to market with your contemporary art wares. The conclusion was don't sell at Phillips work that could be accepted for consignment at either Sotheby's or Christie's (in contrast to some big-ticket items at the evening sale); but, were there any buying opportunities on the cheap? One must be mindful of the provenance of an artwork if ever it is deemed time to rearrange the walls and sell! Phillips didn't seem capable of selling off even basic Polkes or Richters. Nevertheless, a word on Warhol as far as Polaroids are concerned: stay away from Dennis Hopper altogether, images of the actor were duds at both Sotheby's and Phillips. If you were intent on buying Warhol Polaroids for which the estate is said to be in possession of thousands, Phillips offered a nearly 10% discount on an object that was virtually identical to what the other houses were offering. Towards the end of Phillips day sale, nearly everything went unsold, which could have reflected purchasers taxed attention spans and provided some opportunities (to dispose of some spare cash, earmarked for say, food or shoes). For instance, a 1988 Thomas Ruff photograph for less than $1000 (all prices quoted include auction house premiums) is not too bad an impulse splurge.
A song about Cindy Sherman's recent auction track record could conceivably be entitled Still Liquid After All These Years. Sherman is the closest thing contemporary art has to a rational, orderly, liquid market in the way of buying and selling her photographs. There is international depth to the demand the likes of which are rarely seen in the greater contemporary market. After the Museum of Modern Art purchased the Film Stills body of work for a reputed $1,000,000, there has been a profusion of her photos to hit the auction houses. Despite this factor, there has yet to be a marked downtown in collectors, dealers and curators enthusiasm in owning the work. This is truly consequential, with the photographs remaining tremendously focused and consistent over years without much in the way of variation. This is also an argument in support of the widely accepted notion that the market favors emblematic work that does not stray too far from the signature vocabulary of the artist. Specifically regarding Sherman, the level of connoisseurship that differentiates similarly editioned and sized prints from the same time periods can be very subtle and thus daunting for the untrained and trained eye alike. What makes one image of Cindy go for a quarter of a million dollars and another fetch only $30,000? Buyers at the high end beware. As an aside, existentially speaking, doesn't she ever tire of bending over the pond, playing dress-up and peering endlessly at her reflection?
Could it be the touchstone of an art recession? Did I detect some evidence of softening in the steam-rolling Damien Hirst market? Did the bacchanalian "bad boy" miss his numbers? In the way of trends pointing downward, the following could be an early indication for the future-look out if you are holding work considered not seminal or exceptional in quality, i.e., prints, or ominously for gluttonous collectors and institutions, some spot or spin paintings! For example, the recent auction results for the photo edition entitled With Dead Head from when artist was 16 years old! This print in an edition 15, was remade in 1991 when the 26 year old had since matured and/or had an epiphany about the merit of the original snap. It went from $74,000 at Phillips in May 2000 and the same amount at Christie's in November 1999 to $49,450 at Phillips last November 14th. A strange economic feat reared its head two days later, conceivably because of the pall that befell With Dead Head at Phillips, when the photo went on to sell for $44,650 during the evening sale (no less) at Christie's. When future buyers take note of the instant 10% depreciation from one day to the next, and the close to 50% drop in only six months, the NASDAQ appears a safe haven from the capriciousness of the seemingly mad art world. Sotheby's offered up 3-Bromobenzaldehyde, an 18 inch square, undated in the catalogue, spot painting with an estimate of $40,000-60,000. That worked out to $40,000-60,000 for one full-fledged spot flanked by eight additional spot fragments. You do the math to figure out why it did not sell.
The print portfolio The Last Supper, estimated at $30,000-40,000 at Sotheby's sold for $52,500 and two days later, at Christie's, when estimated at $25,000 - 30,000 actually sold for $49,350. For a lot-selling-lad whom needs to know: does a higher estimate necessarily indicate a higher hammer price? What makes the same thing (in apparently the same condition) have a loss in value of $3,150 from the 15th to the 17th of November 2000? Implausibly, as seen above, two days can make a hell of a difference at the contemporary art auctions. To test a theory, the next time two of the same lots come up for sale at different auction houses, wait for the second and underbid the results of the first. Yet, in defense of the incongruity and still-powerful Hirst market phenomenon, the suite was put into the "Prints and Multiples" section of the Christie's auction which occurred at the end of the day sale. At that time, as seen at Phillips, the tedium must have set in enough to relieve the portfolio of any momentum from the "regular" sale or the prior Sotheby's result. A rule when selling, if possible, is to stay away from a lessening in perception of value when the nomenclature "Prints and Multiples" is used to distinguish from "Contemporary Art" with regard to a particular lot. On the other hand, this could also result in buying opportunities.
Meatballs (not the Bill Murray film, though he would surely get a laugh out of this), a single image from the 13 print portfolio, further illustrates the creeping Hirst downturn. The individual silkscreen went for $4,830 at Phillips, which still amounts to an approximately $1000 premium if you bought the entire group of prints from Sotheby's or Christie's. Last May, Christie's sold the same individual screenprint for $5,288. The piece entitled Sausages from the portfolio was deemed not as tasty and sold last May for $3,760 at Christie's. As Hirst aptly put it himself in the title of a multiple with a Ping-Pong ball, hairdryer and Plexiglas container: What Goes Up Must Come Down.
If a John's flag or a Pollack all-over drip aren't within your budget, you can make an appropriationist pure play by going for an Elaine Sturtevant or Mike Bidlo, which both performed surprisingly well above estimates. These artists make exact replicas of modern masters under the conceptual rubric of...perhaps they just can't devise anything to fill the blank canvas with. In any event, a Sturtevant copy of a John's flag estimated at $8,000-10,000 sold for an astonishingly high $41,000 and for a Bidlo Not Pollack Pollack the result was $32,900 after an estimate of$10,000-15,000. Perhaps now is the time for the erudite Sturtevant or Bidlo to pick up a spin painting machine at their local toy store?
Up Ticks
Artists that recently have experienced a market resurgence include Richard Prince, who continues to spiral upwards for select works after his re-photograph of Brooke Shields recently hit $150,000 and Donald Baechler, who made a striking upwards move on a 1989 painting with an estimate of $30,000-40,000 which sold for $149,000. A flower work on paper also came in at double the high estimate. It has been ten long years since Baechler broke six figures at auction, though he has exhibited much strength throughout the years on the international gallery circuit. Exactly coinciding with Jeffrey Deitch snagging the Keith Haring estate from Tony Shafrazi, there was explosive growth with most Haring works to come to auction, save for the work Phillips couldn't sell; at the least, they are consistent. George Condo did nicely, with conservative growth over his recent auction history.
Down Ticks
A colossal surprise surfaced with regard to Matthew Barney, the darling of the smart art set, when his photographic print in an edition of 30 sold for $46,750 at Sotheby's as opposed to $76,375 when it graced the cover of Christie's day sale six months before in May 2000! Another instance of a nearly 50% loss of value, which using any economic barometer is clear evidence of trouble afoot. The 1980's excess and lack of imaginative content keeps Robert Longo un-saleable as opposed to unassailable (rightfully so?); Donald Sultan has not been able to claw his way out of the tar pits since the Japanese once kept his market afloat. The dreamy abstractions of Ross Bleckner stayed as soft on the market as they are to the eye. No movement at all was seen on the store-bought displays arranged by Haim Steinbach, who's shelve accumulations could be undervalued as the poor man's Damien Hirst. Peter Halley is treading water price-wise, though more consistently selling. Nan Goldin has begun a well-deserved dimming of her light, which highlights the fact that enough really is enough. Though Julian Schnabel exhibited some modest sales activity, most of his work consistently goes unsold; however, with the glowing reviews and Venice Film Festival first prize for his latest film, Before Night Falls, look for a resurgence in his paintings coming next to an auction house near you.
Personal Picks
The following artists' work I believe is extremely undervalued, especially in relation to what other pieces by similar artists in the same genre go for. Karen Kilimnik's (vs. Elizabeth Peyton) mysterious, romantic painterly depictions of banality á la Jeff Koons are charming. Gary Simons erasure pieces are poignant (vs. Glen Ligon); the playful assemblages of Jessica Stockholder and electrical sculptures and videos by Matthew McCaslin (vs. Jason Rhodes); black & white photographs by Nobuyoshi Araki (vs. Andres Serrano); paintings by Nicole Eisenman (vs. Sue Williams); Cady Noland silkscreens (vs. Warhol). The time is right for Christian Schumann's paintings including text and cartoons, with upcoming shows at Gagosian in Los Angeles and Jay Jopling in London in the coming year (vs. Chris Offili). Richard Artschwager's (vs. any 60's pop artist you can think of) Celotex, Formica, and wood paintings are wonderful and worth holding on to, I covet one. Good Frank Stella works on paper from the 1970's can still be had for $8,000-15,000 and are comparable to Treasury Bills in safety (vs. Ellsworth Kelly or Brice Marden). Robert Smithson (vs. Richard Serra) drawings are a steal at auction, as opposed to the retail market where the estate keeps prices artificially high due to payback for market neglect during his lifetime.
Additionally, I like Kenneth Noland (vs. Ugo Rondinone); and Larry Poons (vs. Terry Winters); and, anything Vito Acconci (vs. Marcel Duchamp). It seems positively shocking that the work of John Baldessari (vs. Paul Pfeiffer) does not reflect the absurd price movements of some of the younger photographers and new media artists-sometimes the flock overruns the shepherd.
Paul Thek appears in "Painting at the Edge of the World" at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a show (allegedly) "uniting 30 international artists who address the continued relevance-and expanding boundaries-of painting." This highfalutin language, in any event, signifies a great group exhibition in addition to Thek featuring the work of artists like Marcel Broodthaers, Mike Kelley, Thomas Schütte and younger talent such as Jim Lambie (UK) and Laura Owens (US). Paul Thek is a tragically under-recognized American artist who's retrospective The Wonderful World That Almost Was, which originated at the Wiitte de With in Rotterdam in 1995, traveled for two years to many European destinations, but never touched down in the US. Though Thek spent much of his life abroad, the breadth of his oeuvre and his refusal to follow formulaic paths favored by dealers and collectors, contributed to his penniless, near anonymity at the time of his premature death in 1988. Barely any US institutions had collected any of the varied work of Thek at the time, including the prescient, shocking fake meat sculptures he created in the early sixties, one occupying an authentic Warhol Brillo box upended, now in the collection of Hirschorn Museum in Washington D.C. Additionally, Thek painted fanciful, irreverent pictures, some including text, on sheets of newspaper and small canvases adorned with picture lights and gold frames he chose for them. Finally, the US seems to be following the lead of Europe to appreciate and showcase the work of an artist with a defiant social, political and historical outlook coupled with a beautiful aesthetic to boot. A rarity in conceptual art, hence a strong buy.
Shifting Landscapes
Neil Jenney will have a major, far-reaching exhibition at Gagosian, and the Tony Smith estate will shift from Paula Cooper to Matthew Marks. Look for a big move in both markets. Kenny Scharf, believe it or not, scored $79,900 on an 80's painting estimated at Christie's for $10,000-15,000. Perhaps the recent Los Angeles Gagosian exhibit jumpstarted things, for what else in the world could account for such a shift?
Inside information: if this recently noted tidbit pans out, one could conceivably trade ahead of the market and prosper from it, if not, I hereby disclaim responsibility. George Condo is rumored, by someone in the know, to be heading to Gagsoian Worldwide (has a nice Thomas Krens-ian ring to it) from Pace and recent co-exhibitor Jeffrey Deitch.
Without seeming too gloomy, what would a contemporary art recession look like reflected in the recent stellar five and six figure prices achieved by young artists such as Peter Doig; Cecily Brown; Damien Hirst; Chris Offili; Luc Tuymans; Andreas Gursky; Thomas Struth; Cindy Sherman; John Currin; Matthew Barney; Mariko Mori; Venessa Beecroft; Rineke Dijkstra (a photo with a $15,000-20,000 estimate at Christie's sold $102,800)? It wouldn't be pretty.
What will the spring behold? Some residential real-estate is already reportedly down 15% in New York City, and the Wall Street Journal recently led off the weekend section with a cover story entitled: The Luxury Slump. Could low earnings of technology companies that comprise the majority of the NASDAQ, which contributed to a 50% drop since last spring, foretell a general slump in the economy? Could restaurants, clothing boutiques, galleries and auction houses be the next areas to come up short? There is still plenty of room for a Dow Jones free-fall, especially in relation to the precipitous descent of the tech sector. Nevertheless, this may be an ideal time to assume a contrarian position and go long Microsoft and Apple while piling up on some of the artists mentioned above, all of which are still fairly reasonably priced. To date, an empirical study of some of the city's leading trendy restaurants (all in a day's work) seems to indicate the status quo of high living remains intact-people still have disposable money conspicuously in evidence.
Late in February the Armory art fair will open in expanded quarters in New York with the biggest of three NY venues since its inception, and the largest roster of exhibitors thus far. Look for strong but selective sales, with the fashionable artists du jour continuing to pull their weight. Earlier in February, Christie's and Sotheby's in London will auction off an interesting array of fresh contemporary art, save for the ubiquitous Last Supper portfolio by our friend Damien, and some other odds and ends. Sotheby's is offering the suite of 13 prints with an estimate of $28,400 - $42,600 and Christie's at $29,000 - $43,000, both low estimates are 50% lower than the November results: take heed. Should you go long Meatballs and short Sausages? Will the Hirst print portfolio continue to trend down? My guess is yes, steer clear of overly inflated editions notched as high as 150 copies. All in all, the spring auctions should show clear pockets of softness in the market, though the discerning connoisseur will be able to sort out values that can only rise in the near future. Next January, the Basel Art Fair swallows Art Miami in a corporate take-over that has the art world abuzz, and may finally posit Florida as a serious art destination for the international contemporary set. Despite the empty rhetoric of years past from local Miami art professionals, Basel Miami could truly expand upon the limited poles of New York and Los Angeles as the only cities that matter to the US art economy.
Supplemental Price Information
1. Richard Prince: "Spiritual America" with image of Brooke Shields sold for $151,000 on a $30,000 -- $40,000 estimate at Christies NY in November of 1999. Also, a fact I did not note, his record was reached in May of 2000 at Sotheby's with Untitled Cowboy selling for $269,750 on an estimate of $80,000 - $120,000. Another piece from the same sale went for $225,750 on a $70,000 - $90,000 estimate (Untitled Double Portrait). In November of 2000 a work sold for $99,500 on a 50-70,000 estimate from Christie's and at Sotheby's, a work sold for $104,250 on an estimate of 40-60,000.
Donald Baechler: "Ahmad's Flower #18" work on paper, Christie's November 2000 sold for $30,550 on a 10-15,000 estimate and also at Christie's "Conversazione" went for $149,000 on an estimate of $30-40,000, both pieces I referred to in my piece.
George Condo's November 2000 highlights included $29,500 for an untitled painting estimated at 10-15,000 at Sotheby's and $46,750 for "Still Life Composition" estimated at 15-20,000 also at Sotheby's.
2. Karen Kilimnik has never had a painting for sale at auction, only drawings, until February 9, 2001 at Christie's London, at which time "Scene I The Countryside 1600's" goes on sale with an estimate of $7,448 - $8,937 (conversion from British Pounds). It is a lovely painting that should do nicely. Her drawings, which are an important, striking part of her body of work reached a record of $11,400 at Sotheby's in November of 2000 on an estimate of 4 - $6,000. In 1998 a "scatter art" sculptural assemblage comprised of stuffed animals, fondue pot, artificial snow, etc. sold for $11,500 on an estimate of $10,000 - $15,000. Otherwise, her drawings generally sell in the range of $4,000 - $8,000.
Elizabeth Peyton, on the other hand, has sold one painting that is 14 x 18 inches for $24,150 at Phillips in November of 2000, and another at Christie's for $70,500 with an estimate of $20,000 - $30,000 that was only 19 x 16 inches. A drawing only 7 x 6 inches went for $10,800 at Sotheby's in November of 2000 with an estimate of 7 - $9,000.
Cady Noland, not since 1997 has achieved any price even near $20,000. Her record stands at $26,450 in 1997 May, at Sotheby's. Mostly, her work does not sell at auction and is frequently bought in by the various houses. Conclusion: Don't sell a Cady Noland at auction, period. It is unwise and will result in a costly mistake. On the other hand, you could have bought a fantastic silkscreen on aluminum for $2,700 at Sotheby's in November 2000 on estimates of $2-3,000 and 1,800-2,200 respectively (they both went for $2,700).
Nicole Eisenman has not had any major paintings come up, but her general prices are under $5,000 for works on paper. The record is $5,175 for a gouache at Sotheby's in November of 1999. Recently, in November of 2000 she went from $4,800 to bought in at Sotheby's.
Sue Williams recently scored $56,400 on a painting at Christie's in November of 2000 with an estimate of $30,000 - $40,000; and, in the same sale, $49,350 on a work with an estimate of $30 - 40,000. At Sotheby's, also in November 2000, she reached $49,050 on a painting carrying an estimate of $25,000 - 35,000. Strangely, two great paintings are estimated by Sotheby's in the upcoming February 2001 sale in London at $14,727 - $22,091 (pound conversions) each.
Thirty year old Christian Schumann has sold 4 paintings at auction ranging from 21,150 at Christie's in November 2000 (estimate 10,000 15,000) to $46, 750 at Sotheby's, May 2000 with a 20 - 30,000 estimate. In the recent past, his paintings that are chock full of cartoon imagery, text, and more realistic renderings have sold out at galleries from $25,000 - $35,000. The work smacks of postmodern representations: alive and bustling with a chaotic array of lifted images, and created texts all expertly and painstakingly painted on paper and laid down on canvas. Look for Gagosian to probably raise the prices to the mid-forties range (they have not been priced at the time of this writing) when he shows Schumann in his Beverly Hills gallery on March 12, 2001. Jay Jopling will show the paintings of
Schumann sometime in the Spring of 2001.
Baldessari's record seems to be $203,750 for a work "Choosing (A game for two players) Garlic (in 9 parts) a mounted photograph from 1971 that was estimated for $30,000 - $40,000 at Sotheby's in May of 2000. However, on many occasions his work either does not sell and is bought in, or sells for under $25,000. One could easily pick up a hand painted photographic piece in multiple panels at a wildly reasonable 10 - $15,000; for example, Chrisite's London in February 2001 a photograph with pencil on paper from 1974 is estimated at $7,448 - $10,427 (converted from pounds).
Paul Pfeiffer, who recently appeared in PS 1 Museum's widely acclaimed Greater New York show and the preceding Whitney Biennial sells video pieces at Harlem's The Project Gallery at $25,000 for an edition of six. He has received the first $100,000 Buxbaum Award from the Whitney Biennial, and I am sure he has sold works for more than the average going rate of $25,000. His most known works are a mini screen TV showing a basketball repeatedly bouncing and another with an appropriated image of a basketball player celebrating with a clenched fist. Along with the appropriated works of Douglas Gordon, I award a big ho-hum.
Paul Thek has not had a work at auction since May of 1996 when a painting on canvas 9 x 12 inches sold for all of $1,955, entitled "Bread and Buttocks" dated 1979-80. At present, the retail value of such a painting would be between $15,000 - $20,000. In fact, over the years, Thek has only come to auction a surprisingly low eight times, with a whopping $8,800 for a classic meat sculpture called "Birthday Cake" from 1967 (in 1990 at Sotheby's). This work, measuring 19 x 24.5 x 24.5 inches appeared in his retrospective beginning at the Witte de With in 1995. Aside from being an invaluable masterful sculpture, this work would now sell retail for $75,000. Today, Thek paintings on newspaper print sell in the range of $15,000 and a recent sketchbook with nearly 60 pages of pencil drawings and text sold for $14,500.
Neil Jenney was born in 1945 and actually served as an assistant to Paul Thek in the 1960's when Thek created his signature body castings in latex "The Tomb (Death of a Hippie) and "Fishman". Jenney has stuck fairly close to a formula of painting quasi cartoon-ish figurative works with an underlying environmental motif, always framed in heavy black wood frames with white text emblazoned on the bottom portion of the frame. His recent prices have ranged in the $100,000 vicinity at Sotheby's and Christie's in November of 2000, though one reached $198,500 in Christie's Los Angeles in June of 2000. After a record of $308,000 for a 1969 painting achieved at Christie's in November if 1988 and similarly strong sales in the $200,000 neighborhood up to about 1991, Jenney entered a long term slump. In 2000, only perhaps till word escaped about the upcoming Gagosian show in March of 2001, did the paintings begin their present turnaround.
OUTLOOK FOR SPRING
Versus London no longer makes sense, except in the slight arbitrage that one can accomplish when a seller puts up an American work in the UK where the market is less acute or vice a versa. For instance. the bargain that may develop for a Karen Kilimnik or Sue Williams in London in February, and maybe a Glenn Brown or Mark Francis sold in the US. In the Spring, 2001 look for further selectivity in the auction market with a continuation of the slight, but noticeable trend downward, though we are not through with the spectacular results that will still occur for the lucky few. Hold on, this market has hiccuped, but the party will go on. At least for now...
Phillips was tepid at best and at worst, a dangerous place to go to market with your contemporary art wares. The conclusion was don't sell at Phillips work that could be accepted for consignment at either Sotheby's or Christie's (in contrast to some big-ticket items at the evening sale); but, were there any buying opportunities on the cheap? One must be mindful of the provenance of an artwork if ever it is deemed time to rearrange the walls and sell! Phillips didn't seem capable of selling off even basic Polkes or Richters. Nevertheless, a word on Warhol as far as Polaroids are concerned: stay away from Dennis Hopper altogether, images of the actor were duds at both Sotheby's and Phillips. If you were intent on buying Warhol Polaroids for which the estate is said to be in possession of thousands, Phillips offered a nearly 10% discount on an object that was virtually identical to what the other houses were offering. Towards the end of Phillips day sale, nearly everything went unsold, which could have reflected purchasers taxed attention spans and provided some opportunities (to dispose of some spare cash, earmarked for say, food or shoes). For instance, a 1988 Thomas Ruff photograph for less than $1000 (all prices quoted include auction house premiums) is not too bad an impulse splurge.
A song about Cindy Sherman's recent auction track record could conceivably be entitled Still Liquid After All These Years. Sherman is the closest thing contemporary art has to a rational, orderly, liquid market in the way of buying and selling her photographs. There is international depth to the demand the likes of which are rarely seen in the greater contemporary market. After the Museum of Modern Art purchased the Film Stills body of work for a reputed $1,000,000, there has been a profusion of her photos to hit the auction houses. Despite this factor, there has yet to be a marked downtown in collectors, dealers and curators enthusiasm in owning the work. This is truly consequential, with the photographs remaining tremendously focused and consistent over years without much in the way of variation. This is also an argument in support of the widely accepted notion that the market favors emblematic work that does not stray too far from the signature vocabulary of the artist. Specifically regarding Sherman, the level of connoisseurship that differentiates similarly editioned and sized prints from the same time periods can be very subtle and thus daunting for the untrained and trained eye alike. What makes one image of Cindy go for a quarter of a million dollars and another fetch only $30,000? Buyers at the high end beware. As an aside, existentially speaking, doesn't she ever tire of bending over the pond, playing dress-up and peering endlessly at her reflection?
Could it be the touchstone of an art recession? Did I detect some evidence of softening in the steam-rolling Damien Hirst market? Did the bacchanalian "bad boy" miss his numbers? In the way of trends pointing downward, the following could be an early indication for the future-look out if you are holding work considered not seminal or exceptional in quality, i.e., prints, or ominously for gluttonous collectors and institutions, some spot or spin paintings! For example, the recent auction results for the photo edition entitled With Dead Head from when artist was 16 years old! This print in an edition 15, was remade in 1991 when the 26 year old had since matured and/or had an epiphany about the merit of the original snap. It went from $74,000 at Phillips in May 2000 and the same amount at Christie's in November 1999 to $49,450 at Phillips last November 14th. A strange economic feat reared its head two days later, conceivably because of the pall that befell With Dead Head at Phillips, when the photo went on to sell for $44,650 during the evening sale (no less) at Christie's. When future buyers take note of the instant 10% depreciation from one day to the next, and the close to 50% drop in only six months, the NASDAQ appears a safe haven from the capriciousness of the seemingly mad art world. Sotheby's offered up 3-Bromobenzaldehyde, an 18 inch square, undated in the catalogue, spot painting with an estimate of $40,000-60,000. That worked out to $40,000-60,000 for one full-fledged spot flanked by eight additional spot fragments. You do the math to figure out why it did not sell.
The print portfolio The Last Supper, estimated at $30,000-40,000 at Sotheby's sold for $52,500 and two days later, at Christie's, when estimated at $25,000 - 30,000 actually sold for $49,350. For a lot-selling-lad whom needs to know: does a higher estimate necessarily indicate a higher hammer price? What makes the same thing (in apparently the same condition) have a loss in value of $3,150 from the 15th to the 17th of November 2000? Implausibly, as seen above, two days can make a hell of a difference at the contemporary art auctions. To test a theory, the next time two of the same lots come up for sale at different auction houses, wait for the second and underbid the results of the first. Yet, in defense of the incongruity and still-powerful Hirst market phenomenon, the suite was put into the "Prints and Multiples" section of the Christie's auction which occurred at the end of the day sale. At that time, as seen at Phillips, the tedium must have set in enough to relieve the portfolio of any momentum from the "regular" sale or the prior Sotheby's result. A rule when selling, if possible, is to stay away from a lessening in perception of value when the nomenclature "Prints and Multiples" is used to distinguish from "Contemporary Art" with regard to a particular lot. On the other hand, this could also result in buying opportunities.
Meatballs (not the Bill Murray film, though he would surely get a laugh out of this), a single image from the 13 print portfolio, further illustrates the creeping Hirst downturn. The individual silkscreen went for $4,830 at Phillips, which still amounts to an approximately $1000 premium if you bought the entire group of prints from Sotheby's or Christie's. Last May, Christie's sold the same individual screenprint for $5,288. The piece entitled Sausages from the portfolio was deemed not as tasty and sold last May for $3,760 at Christie's. As Hirst aptly put it himself in the title of a multiple with a Ping-Pong ball, hairdryer and Plexiglas container: What Goes Up Must Come Down.
If a John's flag or a Pollack all-over drip aren't within your budget, you can make an appropriationist pure play by going for an Elaine Sturtevant or Mike Bidlo, which both performed surprisingly well above estimates. These artists make exact replicas of modern masters under the conceptual rubric of...perhaps they just can't devise anything to fill the blank canvas with. In any event, a Sturtevant copy of a John's flag estimated at $8,000-10,000 sold for an astonishingly high $41,000 and for a Bidlo Not Pollack Pollack the result was $32,900 after an estimate of$10,000-15,000. Perhaps now is the time for the erudite Sturtevant or Bidlo to pick up a spin painting machine at their local toy store?
Up Ticks
Artists that recently have experienced a market resurgence include Richard Prince, who continues to spiral upwards for select works after his re-photograph of Brooke Shields recently hit $150,000 and Donald Baechler, who made a striking upwards move on a 1989 painting with an estimate of $30,000-40,000 which sold for $149,000. A flower work on paper also came in at double the high estimate. It has been ten long years since Baechler broke six figures at auction, though he has exhibited much strength throughout the years on the international gallery circuit. Exactly coinciding with Jeffrey Deitch snagging the Keith Haring estate from Tony Shafrazi, there was explosive growth with most Haring works to come to auction, save for the work Phillips couldn't sell; at the least, they are consistent. George Condo did nicely, with conservative growth over his recent auction history.
Down Ticks
A colossal surprise surfaced with regard to Matthew Barney, the darling of the smart art set, when his photographic print in an edition of 30 sold for $46,750 at Sotheby's as opposed to $76,375 when it graced the cover of Christie's day sale six months before in May 2000! Another instance of a nearly 50% loss of value, which using any economic barometer is clear evidence of trouble afoot. The 1980's excess and lack of imaginative content keeps Robert Longo un-saleable as opposed to unassailable (rightfully so?); Donald Sultan has not been able to claw his way out of the tar pits since the Japanese once kept his market afloat. The dreamy abstractions of Ross Bleckner stayed as soft on the market as they are to the eye. No movement at all was seen on the store-bought displays arranged by Haim Steinbach, who's shelve accumulations could be undervalued as the poor man's Damien Hirst. Peter Halley is treading water price-wise, though more consistently selling. Nan Goldin has begun a well-deserved dimming of her light, which highlights the fact that enough really is enough. Though Julian Schnabel exhibited some modest sales activity, most of his work consistently goes unsold; however, with the glowing reviews and Venice Film Festival first prize for his latest film, Before Night Falls, look for a resurgence in his paintings coming next to an auction house near you.
Personal Picks
The following artists' work I believe is extremely undervalued, especially in relation to what other pieces by similar artists in the same genre go for. Karen Kilimnik's (vs. Elizabeth Peyton) mysterious, romantic painterly depictions of banality á la Jeff Koons are charming. Gary Simons erasure pieces are poignant (vs. Glen Ligon); the playful assemblages of Jessica Stockholder and electrical sculptures and videos by Matthew McCaslin (vs. Jason Rhodes); black & white photographs by Nobuyoshi Araki (vs. Andres Serrano); paintings by Nicole Eisenman (vs. Sue Williams); Cady Noland silkscreens (vs. Warhol). The time is right for Christian Schumann's paintings including text and cartoons, with upcoming shows at Gagosian in Los Angeles and Jay Jopling in London in the coming year (vs. Chris Offili). Richard Artschwager's (vs. any 60's pop artist you can think of) Celotex, Formica, and wood paintings are wonderful and worth holding on to, I covet one. Good Frank Stella works on paper from the 1970's can still be had for $8,000-15,000 and are comparable to Treasury Bills in safety (vs. Ellsworth Kelly or Brice Marden). Robert Smithson (vs. Richard Serra) drawings are a steal at auction, as opposed to the retail market where the estate keeps prices artificially high due to payback for market neglect during his lifetime.
Additionally, I like Kenneth Noland (vs. Ugo Rondinone); and Larry Poons (vs. Terry Winters); and, anything Vito Acconci (vs. Marcel Duchamp). It seems positively shocking that the work of John Baldessari (vs. Paul Pfeiffer) does not reflect the absurd price movements of some of the younger photographers and new media artists-sometimes the flock overruns the shepherd.
Paul Thek appears in "Painting at the Edge of the World" at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a show (allegedly) "uniting 30 international artists who address the continued relevance-and expanding boundaries-of painting." This highfalutin language, in any event, signifies a great group exhibition in addition to Thek featuring the work of artists like Marcel Broodthaers, Mike Kelley, Thomas Schütte and younger talent such as Jim Lambie (UK) and Laura Owens (US). Paul Thek is a tragically under-recognized American artist who's retrospective The Wonderful World That Almost Was, which originated at the Wiitte de With in Rotterdam in 1995, traveled for two years to many European destinations, but never touched down in the US. Though Thek spent much of his life abroad, the breadth of his oeuvre and his refusal to follow formulaic paths favored by dealers and collectors, contributed to his penniless, near anonymity at the time of his premature death in 1988. Barely any US institutions had collected any of the varied work of Thek at the time, including the prescient, shocking fake meat sculptures he created in the early sixties, one occupying an authentic Warhol Brillo box upended, now in the collection of Hirschorn Museum in Washington D.C. Additionally, Thek painted fanciful, irreverent pictures, some including text, on sheets of newspaper and small canvases adorned with picture lights and gold frames he chose for them. Finally, the US seems to be following the lead of Europe to appreciate and showcase the work of an artist with a defiant social, political and historical outlook coupled with a beautiful aesthetic to boot. A rarity in conceptual art, hence a strong buy.
Shifting Landscapes
Neil Jenney will have a major, far-reaching exhibition at Gagosian, and the Tony Smith estate will shift from Paula Cooper to Matthew Marks. Look for a big move in both markets. Kenny Scharf, believe it or not, scored $79,900 on an 80's painting estimated at Christie's for $10,000-15,000. Perhaps the recent Los Angeles Gagosian exhibit jumpstarted things, for what else in the world could account for such a shift?
Inside information: if this recently noted tidbit pans out, one could conceivably trade ahead of the market and prosper from it, if not, I hereby disclaim responsibility. George Condo is rumored, by someone in the know, to be heading to Gagsoian Worldwide (has a nice Thomas Krens-ian ring to it) from Pace and recent co-exhibitor Jeffrey Deitch.
Without seeming too gloomy, what would a contemporary art recession look like reflected in the recent stellar five and six figure prices achieved by young artists such as Peter Doig; Cecily Brown; Damien Hirst; Chris Offili; Luc Tuymans; Andreas Gursky; Thomas Struth; Cindy Sherman; John Currin; Matthew Barney; Mariko Mori; Venessa Beecroft; Rineke Dijkstra (a photo with a $15,000-20,000 estimate at Christie's sold $102,800)? It wouldn't be pretty.
What will the spring behold? Some residential real-estate is already reportedly down 15% in New York City, and the Wall Street Journal recently led off the weekend section with a cover story entitled: The Luxury Slump. Could low earnings of technology companies that comprise the majority of the NASDAQ, which contributed to a 50% drop since last spring, foretell a general slump in the economy? Could restaurants, clothing boutiques, galleries and auction houses be the next areas to come up short? There is still plenty of room for a Dow Jones free-fall, especially in relation to the precipitous descent of the tech sector. Nevertheless, this may be an ideal time to assume a contrarian position and go long Microsoft and Apple while piling up on some of the artists mentioned above, all of which are still fairly reasonably priced. To date, an empirical study of some of the city's leading trendy restaurants (all in a day's work) seems to indicate the status quo of high living remains intact-people still have disposable money conspicuously in evidence.
Late in February the Armory art fair will open in expanded quarters in New York with the biggest of three NY venues since its inception, and the largest roster of exhibitors thus far. Look for strong but selective sales, with the fashionable artists du jour continuing to pull their weight. Earlier in February, Christie's and Sotheby's in London will auction off an interesting array of fresh contemporary art, save for the ubiquitous Last Supper portfolio by our friend Damien, and some other odds and ends. Sotheby's is offering the suite of 13 prints with an estimate of $28,400 - $42,600 and Christie's at $29,000 - $43,000, both low estimates are 50% lower than the November results: take heed. Should you go long Meatballs and short Sausages? Will the Hirst print portfolio continue to trend down? My guess is yes, steer clear of overly inflated editions notched as high as 150 copies. All in all, the spring auctions should show clear pockets of softness in the market, though the discerning connoisseur will be able to sort out values that can only rise in the near future. Next January, the Basel Art Fair swallows Art Miami in a corporate take-over that has the art world abuzz, and may finally posit Florida as a serious art destination for the international contemporary set. Despite the empty rhetoric of years past from local Miami art professionals, Basel Miami could truly expand upon the limited poles of New York and Los Angeles as the only cities that matter to the US art economy.
Supplemental Price Information
1. Richard Prince: "Spiritual America" with image of Brooke Shields sold for $151,000 on a $30,000 -- $40,000 estimate at Christies NY in November of 1999. Also, a fact I did not note, his record was reached in May of 2000 at Sotheby's with Untitled Cowboy selling for $269,750 on an estimate of $80,000 - $120,000. Another piece from the same sale went for $225,750 on a $70,000 - $90,000 estimate (Untitled Double Portrait). In November of 2000 a work sold for $99,500 on a 50-70,000 estimate from Christie's and at Sotheby's, a work sold for $104,250 on an estimate of 40-60,000.
Donald Baechler: "Ahmad's Flower #18" work on paper, Christie's November 2000 sold for $30,550 on a 10-15,000 estimate and also at Christie's "Conversazione" went for $149,000 on an estimate of $30-40,000, both pieces I referred to in my piece.
George Condo's November 2000 highlights included $29,500 for an untitled painting estimated at 10-15,000 at Sotheby's and $46,750 for "Still Life Composition" estimated at 15-20,000 also at Sotheby's.
2. Karen Kilimnik has never had a painting for sale at auction, only drawings, until February 9, 2001 at Christie's London, at which time "Scene I The Countryside 1600's" goes on sale with an estimate of $7,448 - $8,937 (conversion from British Pounds). It is a lovely painting that should do nicely. Her drawings, which are an important, striking part of her body of work reached a record of $11,400 at Sotheby's in November of 2000 on an estimate of 4 - $6,000. In 1998 a "scatter art" sculptural assemblage comprised of stuffed animals, fondue pot, artificial snow, etc. sold for $11,500 on an estimate of $10,000 - $15,000. Otherwise, her drawings generally sell in the range of $4,000 - $8,000.
Elizabeth Peyton, on the other hand, has sold one painting that is 14 x 18 inches for $24,150 at Phillips in November of 2000, and another at Christie's for $70,500 with an estimate of $20,000 - $30,000 that was only 19 x 16 inches. A drawing only 7 x 6 inches went for $10,800 at Sotheby's in November of 2000 with an estimate of 7 - $9,000.
Cady Noland, not since 1997 has achieved any price even near $20,000. Her record stands at $26,450 in 1997 May, at Sotheby's. Mostly, her work does not sell at auction and is frequently bought in by the various houses. Conclusion: Don't sell a Cady Noland at auction, period. It is unwise and will result in a costly mistake. On the other hand, you could have bought a fantastic silkscreen on aluminum for $2,700 at Sotheby's in November 2000 on estimates of $2-3,000 and 1,800-2,200 respectively (they both went for $2,700).
Nicole Eisenman has not had any major paintings come up, but her general prices are under $5,000 for works on paper. The record is $5,175 for a gouache at Sotheby's in November of 1999. Recently, in November of 2000 she went from $4,800 to bought in at Sotheby's.
Sue Williams recently scored $56,400 on a painting at Christie's in November of 2000 with an estimate of $30,000 - $40,000; and, in the same sale, $49,350 on a work with an estimate of $30 - 40,000. At Sotheby's, also in November 2000, she reached $49,050 on a painting carrying an estimate of $25,000 - 35,000. Strangely, two great paintings are estimated by Sotheby's in the upcoming February 2001 sale in London at $14,727 - $22,091 (pound conversions) each.
Thirty year old Christian Schumann has sold 4 paintings at auction ranging from 21,150 at Christie's in November 2000 (estimate 10,000 15,000) to $46, 750 at Sotheby's, May 2000 with a 20 - 30,000 estimate. In the recent past, his paintings that are chock full of cartoon imagery, text, and more realistic renderings have sold out at galleries from $25,000 - $35,000. The work smacks of postmodern representations: alive and bustling with a chaotic array of lifted images, and created texts all expertly and painstakingly painted on paper and laid down on canvas. Look for Gagosian to probably raise the prices to the mid-forties range (they have not been priced at the time of this writing) when he shows Schumann in his Beverly Hills gallery on March 12, 2001. Jay Jopling will show the paintings of
Schumann sometime in the Spring of 2001.
Baldessari's record seems to be $203,750 for a work "Choosing (A game for two players) Garlic (in 9 parts) a mounted photograph from 1971 that was estimated for $30,000 - $40,000 at Sotheby's in May of 2000. However, on many occasions his work either does not sell and is bought in, or sells for under $25,000. One could easily pick up a hand painted photographic piece in multiple panels at a wildly reasonable 10 - $15,000; for example, Chrisite's London in February 2001 a photograph with pencil on paper from 1974 is estimated at $7,448 - $10,427 (converted from pounds).
Paul Pfeiffer, who recently appeared in PS 1 Museum's widely acclaimed Greater New York show and the preceding Whitney Biennial sells video pieces at Harlem's The Project Gallery at $25,000 for an edition of six. He has received the first $100,000 Buxbaum Award from the Whitney Biennial, and I am sure he has sold works for more than the average going rate of $25,000. His most known works are a mini screen TV showing a basketball repeatedly bouncing and another with an appropriated image of a basketball player celebrating with a clenched fist. Along with the appropriated works of Douglas Gordon, I award a big ho-hum.
Paul Thek has not had a work at auction since May of 1996 when a painting on canvas 9 x 12 inches sold for all of $1,955, entitled "Bread and Buttocks" dated 1979-80. At present, the retail value of such a painting would be between $15,000 - $20,000. In fact, over the years, Thek has only come to auction a surprisingly low eight times, with a whopping $8,800 for a classic meat sculpture called "Birthday Cake" from 1967 (in 1990 at Sotheby's). This work, measuring 19 x 24.5 x 24.5 inches appeared in his retrospective beginning at the Witte de With in 1995. Aside from being an invaluable masterful sculpture, this work would now sell retail for $75,000. Today, Thek paintings on newspaper print sell in the range of $15,000 and a recent sketchbook with nearly 60 pages of pencil drawings and text sold for $14,500.
Neil Jenney was born in 1945 and actually served as an assistant to Paul Thek in the 1960's when Thek created his signature body castings in latex "The Tomb (Death of a Hippie) and "Fishman". Jenney has stuck fairly close to a formula of painting quasi cartoon-ish figurative works with an underlying environmental motif, always framed in heavy black wood frames with white text emblazoned on the bottom portion of the frame. His recent prices have ranged in the $100,000 vicinity at Sotheby's and Christie's in November of 2000, though one reached $198,500 in Christie's Los Angeles in June of 2000. After a record of $308,000 for a 1969 painting achieved at Christie's in November if 1988 and similarly strong sales in the $200,000 neighborhood up to about 1991, Jenney entered a long term slump. In 2000, only perhaps till word escaped about the upcoming Gagosian show in March of 2001, did the paintings begin their present turnaround.
OUTLOOK FOR SPRING
Versus London no longer makes sense, except in the slight arbitrage that one can accomplish when a seller puts up an American work in the UK where the market is less acute or vice a versa. For instance. the bargain that may develop for a Karen Kilimnik or Sue Williams in London in February, and maybe a Glenn Brown or Mark Francis sold in the US. In the Spring, 2001 look for further selectivity in the auction market with a continuation of the slight, but noticeable trend downward, though we are not through with the spectacular results that will still occur for the lucky few. Hold on, this market has hiccuped, but the party will go on. At least for now...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)