Slow Down. Support Your Local Smaller Art Gallery

The death of the "mom-and-pop" art gallery is being discussed in depth by Marc Spiegler et al. over at ArtWorld Salon and in artnet.de, but there are a few things about this that I think make sense to discuss in the context of the dialog here, and a few things I'd be curious to learn via your thoughts on the subject.

The growing firestorm was ignited last year apparently by Amy Cappellazzo, co-head of Post-War and Contemporary at Christie´s

[She] was quoted in Art Review saying that she expects to someday be auctioning brand-new works, saying, “We’re the big box retailer putting the mom-and-pops out of business.” Cappellazzo says the quote was taken out of context; apparently she meant it as a description of how auction houses are perceived, not their actual aims. But she says seismic shifts are surely afoot. “Auction houses are a barometer of the artworld, and today’s artists have a different relationship to the market,” she explains. “Artists are not ceding so much control to their dealers. They’re leaving for better offers, promoting their own careers, bankrolling projects themselves by working with collectors. The artworld has morphed and shifted. So while the older generation of artists are less likely to work directly with auction houses, for the younger artists that boundary is less delineated.”

Oy vey...where to start. Well, as always, the root of the issue is the best place to begin. Marc sums it up well, as usual:

Despite the strength of the market, [galleries] feel their position is under attack, be it at art fairs [see this post] or in the secondary market. Likewise, auction houses - with their huge staffs and sprawling marketing apparatus - are simply better positioned for the new globalized market, able to target collectors no one (not even the houses) knew existed.

Suddenly, galleries feel forced to play a much more finance-driven game, be it publicly (at auction, as [New York dealer David] Zwirner decried) or privately. “People who never sold work before are selling to auction houses now,” says [New York dealer Roland] Augustine. “A collector of ours, someone who sits on a museum board, just sold a Christopher Wool painting for $2 million. I had sold it to her for $75,000, but she never even offered it back to us. So we find ourselves in the position of calling around to collectors and checking if they want to sell, which is not what I got into this business to be doing.” Given the current market conditions and the way the artworld has evolved, the traditional model of the gallery building its position through close control of its artists’ markets seems shakier than ever. There are too many variables – collectors flipping works at auction, artists defecting to other galleries, sudden market shifts.

There do indeed seem to be major shifts in the way the market works, but what to do about it, is the question. Both of Marc's co-authors on ArtWorld Salon seem to see the writing on the wall for smaller galleries unless they take drastic measures:

Ian Charles Stewart

The strong galleries with good artists, and the ability to locate and promote good new artists, have little to fear. Even if their influence over the secondary market dwindles in the short term, as it must in these volatile times. They will continue to be feted by the fairs and recognised by the auction houses and maintain their position with buyers and artists. It is the second and lower tier galleries that have to worry.

András Szántó

Another, longer term division of labor between small galleries and large arts businesses (be they galleries or auction houses) would be to adopt the model of other creative industries and leave the talent scouting to the small firms. In this model, galleries could focus on what they do best and operate as talent agencies. The production and the distribution would then be the job of larger corporate entities that have the reach and capacity to do the job. This may sound like complete nonsense to some, but it does happen to be the way a couple of other very large cultural industries operate.

My point is that markets and cultural industries are not immutable. They must evolve, and so must galleries.

As noted before, essentially, I believe evolution is the response to change, but I like András' other idea in that comment (consolidating power among smaller galleries to compete) more than resigning ourselves to this talent scout idea of his.

Now I actually wrote a post about this yesterday, including a passionate rant against the auction houses (specifically the idea that they're encouraging young artists to be disloyal to their galleries and deal directly with them [snippet of that rant: I tell you what, Christie's, if that happens, you're gonna get 'em anyway, so why don't we younger galleries just forward you the thousands of submissions we have to sort through now and spare ourselves the trouble?]).

But in re-reading my post, I realized two things: 1) I was angry and 2) I wasn't thinking the issue through very clearly. No one can see what the future will bring for smaller galleries. Some are already adapting to the current challenges with leaner, meaner programming. Others are shooting up through the ranks to challenge the more established galleries, and if they can do it, so can others.

Yes, the idea of pooling their power makes sense (hence you have organizations that cater to younger dealers), but I saw two articles juxtaposed today that made me rethink just how much of the conventional wisdom here is based on reality and how much is based on buying the spin put out by the auction houses.

It's too much to quote, so I'll give the link to these stories on artnews.com:

Christie’s Gets London Gallery And Draws Art Dealers’ Ire

and

Russians Pay Dearly for Art by Their Own at London Sale [emphasis mine]

OK, so it makes sense to highlight the essence of the second story:

Sotheby’s auction of contemporary Russian art in London on Feb. 15 yielded sales of £2.6 million ($5.2 million) amid heavy demand from private Russian collectors.

Which sparked an idea. Rather than play along by the auction house rules and accept second-fiddle status, I think the best thing galleries, and especially younger galleries, can do is constantly focus attention on the one aspect of the auction house business that doesn't serve their customers well. Namely, auction houses intentionally make art more expensive than it has to be, and this only helps the auction houses in the end. After the glamour and excitement of overpaying for a work of art in the flurry of carefully crafted hysteria wears off, collectors are charged heartily (Sotheby's commission rates -- Christie's commission rates) for that momentary thrill. And even the afterglow of media excitement for broken records is short-lived, because the auction houses immediately go into overdrive to inflate the prices by the same artist at the next sale. More than that though, what happens at auctions affects prices everywhere else, meaning that even if you don't currently buy at auctions, you're still paying more than you should have to for the art you buy.

With some folks so rich they don't care if they overpay and the thrill of acquiring that prize piece being worth every cent to them, I think it will take a concerted effort to help everyone else snap out of it, as Bambino would say, and see that supporting your local art gallery---developing a relationship that will ensure you have access and the best prices available---ultimately makes so much more sense than dreaming you can outbid the überwealthy at auctions. Because when the auctions are the only game in town, what do you think is gonna happen to those commission rates then?

The other big advantage to supporting your local smaller art gallery is the luxury it gives you to slow down in making purchases. Collectors can still get first pick at the art by the artists they like, and I don't mean in the frantic previews of art fairs, but rather in the calm and charm of the artist's studio. Yes, that's still possible if you establish that sort or relationship with a gallery that values that experience. Or, you can get your paddle and waive it enthusiastically, hoping the auctioneer will spot you among the throngs of other bidders, while you try to quickly recalculate whether you really need that much money to retire the way you want to. The choice is yours.

Believe me, you're gonna see more on this here.