During the exhibit “Who really creates the art market? – museums, auctions, curators, critics, artists, collectors or galleries,” Bert Gallery hosted two round table discussions to explore the art market from differing perspectives. There was much discussion among the panelists and the posted podcasts on bertgallery.com give you an opportunity to hear from the different constituencies. Despite much debate at the end of the second panel discussion, a frustrated audience member inquired,” But who really does create the art market? What are we to conclude?”

After listening to the programs and pondering this question on a daily basis for the past twenty-two years, I can’t resist editorializing and attempting to answer the question. First though, we need to identify the variables in the art market and then determine how they interact and ultimately what factors dominate.

The art market consists of the “makers of art” - the artists; the venues in which they exhibit work – museums, commercial and non-profit galleries; venues and people who sell their work – galleries, private dealers and auction; and finally, the people who “critique” artists’ work - the art critics and buyers of art.

There are two categories for artists – those that are “living” or contemporary, and those that are “dead.” The conditions for exhibition and sale of the contemporary artist and the dead artist are very different. For this discussion we will concentrate primarily on the contemporary artist.

For the contemporary artist, the traditional way to show their art and reach an audience to exhibit in a gallery, museum or non-profit space. The web has become an additional venue where artists can post images of their work on a website. Most artists seek to exhibit their work in galleries and museums. The standards for galleries and museums vary and are very competitive.

Non-profit gallery spaces usually give artists the most access to exhibit their work. Providence non-profits include places such as AS220 and the Providence Art Club. These galleries do their best to promote the artist’s work and give them experience documenting and showing their artwork. However, the non-profit gallery space’s primary mission is to promote, not to sell an artist’s work. Oftentimes an audience of viewers and buyers can be cultivated in these spaces. Also, an art critical review may help to document the artist’s work and bring attention to a wider audience.

Commercial galleries and museums are a more competitive and difficult arena for an artist to gain entry. For the commercial gallery, exhibits and artwork need to bring in revenue. There are a limited number of artists that a gallery can handle and while there are varying missions or goals for every commercial gallery, ultimately the artist’s marketability is crucial. Art sales are the sole source of income that pays bills and salaries; there are no fundraisers or granting opportunities to raise income for a commercial gallery.

Museum curators however, are not interested in commercial success, but in artists who they believe are exceptionally talented and contribute much to the development of art history.

For an artist to be successful, they must attempt to touch all the various arenas in the art world; exhibit in non-profit and commercial galleries, as well as museums, garner art critical review while their work is on view, and generate sales from buyers. Simply put, they try to build a resume that will result in both commercial and critical success. It is very difficult to achieve this kind of success in all of the art arenas.

In addition to the various segments of the art world, there are also different pedigrees of galleries and museums. Much like colleges and universities, there are “Ivy league” galleries and museums very well known across art communities for their excellence. Most of these are located in major cities, such as New York and London, where the art forces developed nationally and internationally due to history, talent and resources.

Then there are the local and regional galleries and museums. As you might guess, an artist has a higher probability of achieving widespread recognition and financial success if they move from the local and regional arena into national and international centers, very much like moving from the minor leagues to the major leagues in baseball.

Beyond the commercial and critical arenas, there are other factors that enter the formula in a major way. Contemporary artists usually sell their work in galleries and sometimes directly to buyers. Overall, roughly 50 % of all art transactions take place in the gallery market, the remaining in the auction market. While in the past art auctions were dominated by sales of “dead” artists, contemporary artists in auction now make up 18% of the yearly sales. So, in 2006 Sotheby’s reported annual sales of 3.75 billion dollars in auction income, with 18% in the category of contemporary art or 675 million dollars. Therefore, for “living” artists the secondary market-the re-sale of a work of art the original purchaser to a new buyer-may have an impact on the commercial market of an artist’s work.

So who really does create the art market? The answer is different for the “Ivy league” arenas of New York and London compared to the regional. In New York the museums, commercial galleries and art critics hold the most sway in bringing an artist quickly to notice. Art criticism in the New York Times is an important endorsement for an artist; a show at Gagosian Gallery or selection into the Whitney Biennale can pretty much launch an artist’s career. Large numbers of people come to see the artist’s work, regional curators take notice of what the major museums are showing and collectors purchase works from galleries who represent these important artists. For example, Richard Serra is on exhibit at the Tate Modern Museum in London – Gagosian has a sale of his work, the London Times reviews the show and Christie’s has works available for sale in their upcoming Contemporary auctions. In the “Ivy League” arena, usually the art forces align very quickly once notice has come in but one sector.

In Providence or other regional centers, no one art arena dominates, and the alignment of art forces takes time or may never fully coalesce. And if those art forces do indeed coalesce, then they may never extend beyond the region. A sell out gallery show creates local buzz but does not guarantee an artist notice in New York, among national and international collectors. Most of the time, museum curators and art critics do not flock to regional museums to see art exhibits or read local newspaper art reviews.

So for artists working and showing in their local communities the challenge is to try to achieve respect and recognition among nonprofit and commercial galleries, museums and local collectors and critics alike, and then work hard to segue into national markets.
If an artist perseveres and gains notice in a major art center - then the path to critical and financial success is not guaranteed but certainly increases.

All things considered, there is no one segment that “creates the art market” in most artistic communities, the only exception being the “Ivy League” art communities such as New York, London and a few other major centers. But even the status of “Ivy” in the art world changes, and reading the latest contemporary art magazines gives you insight to those shifting tides.

There are two recent trends that may significantly alter the field of the artist. First, the internet allows an artist to bypass “bricks and mortar” institutions and potentially reach a larger audience. Second, art criticism and art reviews in the printed press have significantly declined. Whereas artists twenty years ago enjoyed regular coverage in newspapers and community publications, the decline in coverage significantly restricts an artist getting recognition in their own community. Ironically, it is the emergence of the Internet, which has impacted the printed press, so it will be interesting to see if the web opens more exposure and opportunities for artists than the local press.