Speaker A
Hello dear readers and subscribers. One of the most watched and most sensational topics here on YouTube is that the art world or the art market is a scam designed by the rich to serve the rich. So, is it?
Explores whether the art market is a scam, debunking myths and highlighting the role of collectors, galleries, and gatekeepers in contemporary art.
Key Takeaways
- The art market is not a simple scam; most transactions are modest and involve genuine collectors and artists.
- Art valuation is subjective and influenced by gatekeepers, but public opinion and expert knowledge both play roles.
- Sensationalist videos often distort facts to provoke outrage and go viral.
- Expert opinions in art carry more weight due to experience and study, unlike uninformed opinions.
- The art market’s complexity requires nuanced understanding beyond viral oversimplifications.
Summary
- The video questions the popular claim that the art market is a scam designed by the rich for the rich.
- It highlights that only 2% of art sales exceed $1 million, while the majority are below $50,000, showing most of the market is not dominated by multi-million dollar deals.
- The art market consists mostly of genuine art lovers, small to medium galleries, and artists, not just wealthy elites.
- The subjectivity of art value and the influence of gatekeepers are discussed as key issues often oversimplified in viral videos.
- The video emphasizes the difference between opinions of experts with professional experience and random viewers.
- It compares art to other subjective fields like music, film, and fashion, where opinions vary but expertise matters.
- The power of public taste is acknowledged, with some artworks gaining value and recognition organically from people’s interest.
- Examples like Leo Castelli and the evolving valuation of artworks such as Leonardo Da Vinci’s Salvator Mundi illustrate complexities in art valuation.
- The video critiques sensationalist videos that generalize and misrepresent the art market to gain views.
- Ultimately, it argues that the art market is more nuanced and not simply a scam benefiting only the rich.
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
it as an artist art historian and art Enthusiast in general one of my main interests here on YouTube is Art and YouTube has identified that very easily I'm predominantly looking for well researched and well-presented videos about contempor art but almost everyday
Speaker A
As an artist, art historian, and art enthusiast in general, one of my main interests here on YouTube is art, and YouTube has identified that very easily. I'm predominantly looking for well-researched and well-presented videos about contemporary art, but almost every day viral videos are being suggested in my feed that are renouncing the art world.
Speaker A
stumbled upon this video one of many the Art Market is a scam and rich people run it a very Saucy and click worthy title proving the match made in heaven that is based on hate towards Contemporary Art and the rich and in to add some fuel to
Speaker A
So one day I clicked on one, which is exactly what they are designed to do. So I think they got me there. In doing so, I stumbled upon this video, one of many: "The Art Market is a Scam and Rich People Run It," a very saucy and click-worthy title proving the match made in heaven that is based on hate towards contemporary art and the rich, and to add some fuel to the fire, concluding the art market and its gatekeepers are a scam.
Speaker A
2% of all sales by art dealers art galleries were above 1 million and the vast majority of all transactions with 86% are below 50,000 at auction this number is 94% of all transactions so the majority of the Art Market and the
Speaker A
Well, if that really is the case, then why not make a video about it? The latest art market report by UBS and Art Basel shows that in volume, only 2% of all sales by art dealers and art galleries were above 1 million, and the vast majority of all transactions, with 86%, are below 50,000. At auction, this number is 94% of all transactions.
Speaker A
entire Art Market is a scam is of course a first rather blatant generalization the majority of the Contemporary Art world are art loving collectors small to mediumsized Galleries and artists or art enthusiasts in general normal people who are in it for the art because if you're
Speaker A
So the majority of the art market and the art world has nothing to do with these mind-boggling multi-million dollar sales by the rich, where the alleged scams occur and that are being used in these videos to trigger commotion and consternation to make the video go viral.
Speaker A
problems that they are trying to prove in these videos the subjectivity of Art in relation to its value and influence of The Gatekeepers who get to say which art is good and which isn't allowing them to inflate the economic value of
Speaker A
So the video title stating that the entire art market is a scam is, of course, a first rather blatant generalization. The majority of the contemporary art world are art-loving collectors, small to medium-sized galleries, and artists or art enthusiasts in general, normal people who are in it for the art.
Speaker A
and that opinion can be your truth but is the opinion of a random person with little to know experience and knowledge about art as valuable as the opinion of someone who has been working professionally in art for years and
Speaker A
Because if you're not in it for the art, then it is quite difficult, because even with some money, it is very difficult to make your artistic endeavors lucrative. But that's a topic for an entirely different video.
Speaker A
buy a new car whose opinion would you value the most in your decision person a who does not own a car has no interest in cars or in driving at all and only drives occasionally when they're on a
Speaker A
Before we discuss the actual problems that they are trying to prove in these videos—the subjectivity of art in relation to its value and influence of the gatekeepers who get to say which art is good and which isn't, allowing them to inflate the economic value of the art to perhaps misuse it—gatekeeping and the subjectivity of art is a topic that we have dealt with in another video, and it can be really a hot topic to discuss.
Speaker A
a is as valuable from this perspective as the opinion of person B and this is something we accept in many subjective Fields think of in music in film what is a good film uh but also in fashion Etc
Speaker A
Everyone is entitled to have an opinion about a certain artwork, and that opinion can be your truth. But is the opinion of a random person with little to no experience and knowledge about art as valuable as the opinion of someone who has been working professionally in art for years and perhaps has studied many years to improve their judgment?
Speaker A
picked up by the people because they like it there is a sign that something to it appeals to people that there is something good in it and in art we see this all the time some Works sell themselves not because a curator or
Speaker A
This question, implying that some opinions are more valuable about art than opinions of others, is something that might seem very provocative. It might even upset many. But let's say you're considering buying a new car. Whose opinion would you value the most in your decision?
Speaker A
artist will continue to grow based on the opinion of people and not from Gatekeepers and The Gatekeepers will pick up on it and not vice versa still the one liner we see in all these Sensational Videos is that all the power
Speaker A
Person A, who does not own a car, has no interest in cars or in driving at all, and only drives occasionally when they're on holiday and hire a car, or Person B, the editor of a renowned car magazine who has driven hundreds of cars in their life and drives cars specifically to test them every single day?
Speaker A
important but it always comes second to Art this might sound as a shocking surprise after hearing numerous oversimplifications and these Sensational statements in these viral videos providing sco interpretations over oneoff examples to prove their biased points for instance in the video
Speaker A
It is very hard to argue that the opinion of Person A is as valuable from this perspective as the opinion of Person B, and this is something we accept in many subjective fields. Think of music, film—what is a good film?—but also in fashion, etc.
Speaker A
gradual than the video suggests yet castelly mate lonstein is the overly simple statement they make to prove the power of Gatekeepers and relation to the value of art as lonstein would become one of the most expensive artists at
Speaker A
However, accepting this when it comes to art causes a lot of outrage. Talking about these other subjective industries, another aspect that is often forgotten in art is the power of the people.
Speaker A
20th century trailblazing pop art and being one of the most relevant bodies of work in their time questioning consumer culture and merging popular culture with high end art this particular aspect that the video happens to ignore completely is exactly why Leo castelli decided to
Speaker A
If a song, film, or clothing style is being picked up by the people because they like it, there is a sign that something about it appeals to people, that there is something good in it. And in art, we see this all the time.
Speaker A
of it did not exist it was just uh isolated artists that interested me uh because they came in the wake of uh what I had done uh in the previous years uh namely finding jper Jones renberg TR so
Speaker A
Some works sell themselves, not because a curator or gallery is saying you should buy it, but because we fall in love with it, because they excite us, have something fresh and new to them, and intrigue us.
Speaker A
having any intrinsic value using the extraordinary example of Leonardo DaVinci Salvador Mundi and how it was overlooked and valued for just a few dollars and only became valuable after experts have proven it to be the original Salvador Mundi by the hand of
Speaker A
In fact, when this is the case, the career of the artist will continue to grow based on the opinion of people and not from gatekeepers, and the gatekeepers will pick up on it and not vice versa.
Speaker A
very relevant if we would would copy Lenin's style today it would not have had the same historical relevance as Lenin's Works did in the 60s and if this salvator Mundy was one of the many 19th century compies then it would also not
Speaker A
Still, the one-liner we see in all these sensational videos is that all the power lies with the gatekeepers, making people think that the art does not matter and that it's all about who you know.
Speaker A
Joseph Swan or Thomas Edison did it by the end of the 19th century it was a big deal because that novelty and ingenious invention changed the course of the world if I have a ring it is just a
Speaker A
As we have discussed in our videos with industry-approved career advice for artists, yes, the network is very important, but it always comes second to art.
Speaker A
to you we value authenticity and historical importance strongly and so does art and the Art Market so if anything if you aim to understand the mechanisms of the Art Market one must also understand the mechan is Ms of
Speaker A
This might sound like a shocking surprise after hearing numerous oversimplifications and these sensational statements in these viral videos, providing skewed interpretations over one-off examples to prove their biased points.
Speaker A
it operates in the exact same way as uh moneya laundering with for instance real estate they use art to make Dirty Money clean money via multiple transactions and shell companies so that they cannot retrace where the original or money came
Speaker A
For instance, in the video in question, they use Roy Lichtenstein as an example, stating that Leo Castelli, the leading New York art dealer, made Lichtenstein famous overnight in 1962 because of his power as a gatekeeper.
Speaker A
not mean that the entire real estate industry is a scam does it it is not an art market system but it is a widely spread criminal system and art happens to be very convenient for them to use the more controversial point is when it
Speaker A
In reality, the buildup towards the sold-out show at Castelli Gallery was a lot more gradual than the video suggests. Yet, "Castelli made Lichtenstein" is the overly simple statement they make to prove the power of gatekeepers in relation to the value of art.
Speaker A
million of your income which could save you $4 million this is called a charitable donation reduction and is also applicable to donating to other causes but in this case you're not donating money but an artwork that is valued at a
Speaker A
As Lichtenstein would become one of the most expensive artists at auction years later, so for all intents and purposes, Castelli made Lichtenstein.
Speaker A
course the demanding an appraisal a professional appraisal to have the best possible valuation of the artwork that is being donated and in all honesty that's all one can do but these videos state that it is very easily to
Speaker A
What they seemingly intentionally forget to mention throughout this argument is that Lichtenstein's work in the 1960s was pioneering what would be one of the most important art movements of the second half of the 20th century, trailblazing pop art and being one of the most relevant bodies of work in their time, questioning consumer culture and merging popular culture with high-end art.
Speaker A
appreciate over a few years and shop around for a favorable appraisal to overstate its value and donate it as a work of art to a museum as a $10 million artwork they can already break even with a 4 million tax write off but can you
Speaker A
This particular aspect that the video happens to ignore completely is exactly why Leo Castelli decided to work with Roy Lichtenstein and is exactly why he is so valuable so many years down the line because it proved to be iconic and of great historical value.
Speaker A
even go a step further fur and make up their own numbers for instance this viral video says that you can buy art for $10,000 hire a publicist for 100,000 organize some Gallery events for $ 80,000 and buy a favorable appraisal for
Speaker A
Lichtenstein, Andy Warhol, Oldenburg, Rosenquist—the word pop art, the definition of it, did not exist. It was just isolated artists that interested me because they came in the wake of what I had done in the previous years, namely finding Jasper Johns, Rauschenberg, TR.
Speaker A
to polarize for the sake of views and clicks if the art would have no artistic value at all for the Art Market then with $250,000 you won't be able to get that price from $10,000 to $50,000 yes Gatekeepers money and
Speaker A
So this, to me, seemed a continuation of that development.
Speaker A
on assumptions accusations and conspiracy theories and if you would like to know more about the power of art critics but also how money can manipulate the career of an artist or the Art Market then please let me know
Speaker A
In other words, the economic value of the art was determined by its artistic value and not only because of the judgment of a gatekeeper.
Speaker A
distribution of information fake news and false promises seem to lead to success which is exactly the reason why these sensational videos are being so successful they are designed to generate fuse because fuse result in money and money is winning from the truth I'm very
Speaker A
The exact same video seeds the argument of art not having any intrinsic value using the extraordinary example of Leonardo da Vinci's Salvator Mundi and how it was overlooked and valued for just a few dollars and only became valuable after experts had proven it to be the original Salvator Mundi by the hand of da Vinci himself, one of the most copied portraits across the globe.
Speaker A
the art world that make them lose interest in art or will prevent them from becoming a successful artist and even more how others opportunistically capitalize on feeding this public frustration as a result it is my mission with Kai and especially with this
Speaker A
Yes, the painting is exactly the same, but of course, the context when it comes to the historic value and authenticity of the work is, of course, vastly different and very relevant.
Speaker A
invite all artists watching this video to have a look at our uh resources page at contempor artist.com advice for artists where I have bundled all inform informative and educational videos about the art world for artists thank you so
Speaker A
If we would copy Lichtenstein's style today, it would not have the same historical relevance as Lichtenstein's works did in the '60s, and if this Salvator Mundi was one of the many 19th-century copies, then it would also not have the same value as it turned out to have.
Topics:art marketart scamcontemporary artart valuationart gatekeepersart collectorsart galleriesart expertsart market reportart controversy
