Risk and Uncertainty in the Art World (ISBN: 9781472902924) is a notable attempt at compiling into cohesive curricula research by scholars such as Marina Bianchi, Tom Christopherson, Neil De Marchi, Elroy Dimson, Tom Flynn, Daiva Jurevičieně, Arjo Klamer, Roman Kräussl, Javier Lumbreras, Fleur Maijs, Benjamin Mandel, Clare McAndrew, Jianping Mei, Michael Moses, Laurent Noel, Anders Peterson, Rachel Pownall, Olivia Ralevski, Steve Satchell, Jaketrina Savičenko, Aylin Seçkin, Kyle Sommer, Christophe Spaenjers, Nandini Srivastava, Hans Van Miegroet, Thorstein Veblen, Olav Velthuis, and Luca Zan.
Published by Bloomsbury, it is
edited by Anne Dempster (Sotheby’s Institute of Art). Contributors include Tom
Christopherson (Sotheby’s Europe), Anders Petterson (ArtTactic), Olav Velthuis
(University of Amsterdam), Hans J. Van Miegroet and Neil DeMarchi (Duke University),
Marina Bianchi (University of Cassino), Rachel Pownall (University of
Tilburg/University of Maastricht), Elroy Dimson (London Business School), Steve
Satchell and Nandini Srivastava (Cambridge University), Christophe Spaenjers
(HEC Paris), Laurent Noel (Audencia Nantes School of Management), and Arjo
Klamer (Erasmus University).
The book takes a multidisciplinary
approach, through alternative investments, art history, behavioral economics,
cross-cultural studies, due diligence, macro- and microeconomics, Modern
Portfolio Theory, emerging markets, provenance research and many other topics.
It is highly recommended to anyone with an interest in the international art
market.
Petterson’s discussion of how the
Internet has changed the art market was robust. His description of the art
market ecosystem and how it is adapting in light of online galleries, artist
portals, social media, blogs, online auction/art fairs, online inventory
management, price databases, indices, investors, art funds and wealth
management, showed that there both a new audience and desire for transparency.
In creating a more educated consumer, both traditional and upcoming entities
have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Petterson’s article is a treatise
against all those that desire not to adapt to provenance standards in the
market.
Flynn’s discussion of the role of
government and private corporations in art commissioning showed that more needs
to be done in regards to authentication of art in the public space. What was
striking about the article was that it showed a dissonance between corporate views
on art and the industry, itself. A clear conclusion was that, in desiring to
imagine itself as an ‘exception’ to business, the art world has only done
itself more harm. As both a lecturer with the Association for Research into
Crimes against Art and also in hosting a blog titled ArtKnows, Flynn, continues
to be frontier of these discussions.
Satchell and Srivastava’s derivations
about wealth and utility, adding upon Pownall’s essay, showed that there is
still much more to connect between mathematical models, financial markets, and the
art world. Integration of Veblen’s Theory
of the Leisure Class, the price and wealth effects, Marshallian demand,
attempts at indexation – whether through the Financial Times All Shares (FTAS) and the London All Art price index
or the Mei-Moses index – the Miller-Modigliani theorem, and the aesthetic
dividend, make the reader wonder if the time is here for further data integration
with the Standard & Poor’s and Thomson Reuters of the financial world.
The most disappointing was Christopherson’s
essay that showed some dissonance against “testosterone-fuelled bond traders” (Risk and Uncertainty 65). The main
discussion on legal title, authenticity, issues of
attribution comparisons, condition, and valuation was vague. In discussing the
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Artists Resale Rights, and Bribery Act, Christopherson
described a desire to return to an imaginary past. The ultimate lesson learned
appeared that he merely seems unsatisfied with changing business models in the
art market.
No comments:
Post a Comment