Is there a “real” price for art today? That’s the question raised at the recently-held Confluence auction in Chennai
| ASHRAFI S BHAGAT |
| Posted online: Sunday, April 22, 2007 at 0000 hours IST |
Perhaps it would be an exaggeration for some when they hear the statement “art demands possession”. But look at the prices people are willing to pay at auctions to possess a piece of art and you have to agree there might bes a great deal of truth in it. Over centuries, it has been observed that the role and function of art has morphed to suit cultural conditions and recent years have witnessed a tremendous boom in the market for Indian art. Thanks to auction houses such as Christie's and Sotheby’s who have set our benchmarks, as well as the indigenous Osian’s and other online sites, Indian art is setting the cash registers ringing.
Recently, Chennai witnessed an art auction titled Confluence, which was hosted by the Taj Coromandel and Bishwajit and Sarala Banerjee of Artworld. What set apart this charity auction from many others that Chennai has witnessed in the recent past is that it had a persuasive focus on the stalwarts who pioneered the Madras Art Movement in the ’60s.
The auction also raised questions concerning ethics and the price index set for senior artists. Not that Chennai is new to this artistic charity practice as many such auctions have taken place since the ’80s. Here’s a run through: In 1989 Alagu Muthu, Chandra Shankar and Mani Clubwalla raised Rs 4.5 lakh through an auction coordinated by Sharan Apparao for the National Association of Blind; in 1991, Meenakshi Meyappan and Mani Clubwalla, through Murrays, conducted an auction with Chennai-based artists Achuthan, Adimoolam, Gopinath, Nandagopal, Vasudev, Premlatha Seshadhri, et al for for the Spastic Society of India. Apparao held yet another private auction in 1989 on the works of Anjolie Ela Menon. In 2004, for Spastic Society of Tamilnadu Artworld conducted an auction through Bonham’s of London for the Spastic Society of Tamilnadu . In 2006, Art Adda, an artist’s camp organised by Artworld and Taj Connemara of Chennai netted Rs 45 lakh for the Rotary Club; and this year, Confluence grossed Rs 1.2 crore.
The issue at the heart of this auction was the charity. Many senior artists such as A P Santhanaraj, Alphonso Arul Doss, Anthony Doss, K V Haridasan, K M Adimoolam, S G Vasudev, RB Bhaskaran, Anila Jacob, C Dakshinamurthy, P Gopinath, C Douglas, S Nandagopal, P S Nandhan, M Senathipathy, S Paramasivam, Premlatha Seshadhri, S G Vidya Shankar Sthapathy and Palaniappan were able to register the bids from Rs 6.25 lakh for Adimoolam to Rs1.25 lakh for Palaniappan.
The artists undeniably were on a new high and the novice investors were rejoicing since they had in their possession these senior artists’ works. But the gallery consultants were cursing under their breathe with the knowledge that they will be flooded with enquires to sell these artists works at the prices registered here. The question that begs an answer is: Do these auctions set benchmarks? The signals sent out to investors and this particular category of buyers seems totally misleading. Some of the Rotarians were heard remarking: “Anyway I had to give something to charity, so it does not matter who the artist is.”
Of course artists like Gopinath, Alphonos Doss, Haridasan and Nandhan expressed their satisfaction about the prices. But this occurance has only helped in creating a false euphoria among the artist fraternity as well investors. According to Ashwin Rajgopal of Ashvita Gallery: “The collection was haphazardly put together and every bid started at the artist’s current rate, which naturally, only went higher. This is unlike what happened at the Saffron Art auction which started at a much lower price and then went up substantially.” The host gallery was also bidding—an unethical practice—and this was pushing up the prices further for the works of certain artists.
So how transparent and regularised are art auctions today, whether they are for charity or otherwise? How do the investors become aware of “real” prices? The Madras artists are on cloud nine these days and are hoping their works fetch even higher prices. But these ambiguities were again brought to the fore at a panel discussion held a few days later by the artist S G Vasudev titled “Art/Artist at the marketplace”. The discussion, which included cultural critic Sadanand Menon, collector Sanjay Tulsiyan and artist Haridasa, brought to the fore the gallery-auction house nexus, the manipulation of auction houses and the artists selling their souls to enhance their market rates for a better lifestyle.
The glaring question is: Do we continue to perceive art as a cultural artifice, conditioned by the climate in which it was produced or a pure commodity to which a label, driven by the art market, is attached? Where, in this chaotic financial configuration, is the aesthetics and appreciation of the artistic activity? As Sanjay Tulsiyan, who has been an art collector for 25 years, says: “Art has to be bought from the heart and that art work will always live with you. It should not be an artwork that the artist promises to deliver to your house without you having looked at it.” So is there an understanding of the activity of artistic creation or is it perceived as an impersonal piece of stock and investment tucked away in the vault of a bank or in the home of the investor?
—(The writer is a professor of art history at the Department of Fine Arts, Stella Maris College, Chennai)
No comments:
Post a Comment