“You’re fired!”, exclaims bad boy of British art scene, Damien Hirst, to his “employees”. Yes, even Mr.Hirst is suffering from the bursting of the high-end art bubble, brought upon by the recent implosion of the world’s financial system. So, after raking in around $200 million from sales in September, he is now laying off a large proportion of his staff. Now, these employees are not his backoffice staff or his publicists. No, they’re the workers who paint most of his “original” pieces — think, butterflies, colored dots, pills. If you’d like to read more about this, check out the November 22 article from the Guardian.

This brings me back to the title of this article. It turns out that the bursting art bubble may not necessarily be that bad after all. Three reasons. First, art that had reached stratospherically high prices, mostly due to financial speculation, is now suddenly much more affordable. Second, as people revisit their portfolios and their investment strategies, many are realizing that art makes a lasting and wonderful emotional and spiritual investment, moreso than a financial one. Third, a crisis always brings opportunity and innovation, and weeds out mediocrity. So, this is a great time to find great art from exceptional emerging and established artists who will still be producing art — not just because it sells, but because they have an emotional and spiritual need to do so. Much great art comes about in this way.

Despite the ominous ruminations in our financial markets, the busts and bailouts, the plummeting stocks and failing insurers, all is not lost. Not lost that is, if your name is Damien Hirst. On September 15, Mr.Hirst and Sotheby’s, the global auction house, put 223 of his recent works on the block. The first day’s session raked in just over a staggering $127 million.

Head auctioneer calling for bids. Image courtesy of New York Times.

The head of Sotheby’s contemporary art auctions put it this way,

“Damien Hirst is a global artist that [sic] can defy local economies”.

Interestingly enough Mr.Hirst decided to skirt the dealers and galleries, such as Gagosian in New York and White Cube in London, that had represented him up to now and go directly to the public auctions. Good luck to him. During the auction preview around 20,000 flocked in to view his signature works including: dead sharks in formaldehyde, glass cabinets filled with diamonds and cigarette butts, and his more recent series of colored dots and swirls.

Would that we could all defy our local economies during these financially turbulent times.

In the meantime, if you’re searching for an escape from the woes of Wall Street or Main Street and looking for art that’s rather more approachable than Damien Hirst’s pickled sharks come drift away in our calm and beautiful blue space — art251.

To some degree we are art starved. Our home could benefit from more art, and our surroundings could probably get a visual boost from several more, carefully placed, and even more carefully funded, public art works. We like to be surrounded by art. We love exploring new ideas, taking on new perspectives, shaking our sensibilities, diving into pools of color and enveloping ourselves in new forms and textures. These make up some of the reasons we founded art251.

Then, I came across a recent article by Guy Kennaway, novelist, journalist and contemporary art collector, in the Times of London (July 9), describing his fatigue with contemporary art. Surprisingly, I find myself partly agreeing with his sentiments:

I have collected contemporary art since the White Cube [leading contemporary art space, London] was two little rooms up a narrow staircase, 20 years ago. I have been a friend to modern artists and modern art for a very long time, but now – there’s no escaping it – I’ve got contemporary art fatigue. I am swamped by art; it’s on the Tube [Londoners' term for the subway], in restaurants, bars and offices, on the street, at airports, stations and all over the telly [that's television]. It’s impossible to find an art-free space.

It was different 20 years ago when art was confined to galleries and specialist publications, and artists were sensitive, amusing and modest. They were fun to be with, and to champion. Now, art is everywhere…

I can sympathize with his trauma. Art is being co-opted by corporations, mass media has blurred the line between design and art, consumers are printing their own art on tee-shirts, and many artists have become market savvy and market driven. Yet, although art is fast becoming integrated into the global economy its permeation into our culture does remain highly localized. I don’t think Keller or even (north) Texas is likely to become art saturated like London any time soon. And, even in London, while art haystacks may abound, the needles are still there.

Banky’s interpretation of a ubiquitous Damien Hirst spot painting. Image courtesy of flickr

Mr.Kennaway goes on to lay the blame for his exhaustion at the feet of art dealers:

If I go and see a film I can tell if it’s any good, and I am confident about my opinion; if I read a book, I can tell if it’s successful and can explain why. We all can. But with art it’s more tricky. If we are unmoved or unimpressed by a piece of art we worry that the fault lies not with the work but with us. It’s madness.

The cleverest trick the dealers have played is to make us believe that the price of a work of art reflects its quality. It’s no surprise that artists just keep churning the work out. Why shouldn’t they? Damien Hirst’s spots are the new Burberry check, but it doesn’t seem to stop them getting more and more valuable.

Again, I can see his point, but I suspect his analysis applies more so to the upper-reaches of the art market, where typical prices will be more than the average home in our area, and where there is much more to gain (and lose) and faunt. But, like many other social instruments, art continues to be a way for individuals to express their individuality, or their membership in a certain group or their social status. This cannot be a bad thing. Yet, it’s a double-edged sword. As more people enter the monied, middle-class, more will seek from art what once only the elite could afford. So, some artists will jump on the bandwagon — they’ll produce more of what the market-driven market wants, and Damien Hirst, just like Andy Warhol, will hire more “staff” to create “his” works.

Visit any major metropolitan area and you’ll see lots of public art on display. My previous home town, London, is a prime example — there’s great (and some not so great) public art everywhere. I couldn’t imagine the city without it. My current home town, Keller, has some public art, and debates seem to rage on a daily basis as to its cost and value. I’ll leave that analysis and answer to a future article.

This brings me to an interesting twist on public art that seems to be gaining favor in the UK, Netherlands, and France — public loans for private art. The national and local governments of these nations are offering and/or underwriting interest free loans for people to buy art. I can hear artists, gallery owners and art lovers in London, Paris and Amsterdam jumping for joy.

Here’s a peek at the program in the UK, run by the Arts Council (England) courtesy of the Arts Council England website:

The Own Art scheme is designed to make it easy and affordable for everyone to buy contemporary works of art and craft including paintings, photography, sculpture, glassware and furniture.

You can borrow up to £2,000 [about $4,000], or as little as £100 [about $200], and pay back the loan in 10 monthly instalments – interest free. The scheme is available through a network of over 250 participating venues across the country.

Arts Council England aims to put the arts at the heart of national life. One of the ways we do this is to encourage people to live with art they love. We also want to help artists live by their creative output and support galleries who sell high quality contemporary art.

The Arts Council of England spends around $700-800 million on arts projects annually. It derives much of its funding from a percentage of sales from the UK national lottery and private donations. The public in the UK is well aware of the national lottery’s mission to spread wealth, and many arts projects funded in this way have become national treasures.

However, one rather troubling component of the Own Art program is that an “independent” panel selects participating galleries. There are around 250 art spaces involved in this program, and their inclusion is assessed by the level of work they have on display, the training of their gallery staff, the quality of the space and the relationship the gallery has with its artists. I have no doubt that these procedures were put in place for well-meaning reasons, such as avoiding tricksters. However, (government run) bureaucracies seem to have a tendency towards cronyism and waste.

The French have taken a similar but different tack to public arts funding. But, I’ll save this account for another time — it’s not pretty!

On May 14, Christie’s sale of contemporary art netted $348 million. In a good sign for the home art market, around 70 percent of the buyers for the 57 works on sale were from the United States. Mark Rothko’s work “NO.15″ pictured below took in $50.4 million (auctioneer not included).

Now, will similar sentiments continue in the less stratospheric regions of the art market? I believe so. Art still remains a fundamentally good investment (aesthetic and spiritual). So, despite some short-term economic ups and downs, I expect to see more people buying more art over the long-term. Art provides a clear alternative, to that provided by mass-produced sameness, for those who are increasingly looking for the original, unique, rare, obscure, different, authentic.