The Space That Art and its Market Occupy in Indian Society - Part 2

In this series, I explore the artistic movements of the 20th century, hoping to reveal to you the important roles artists played in our Independence, and how despite years of being silenced, the voices of our greatest artists were finally recognised for their expression of identity in the 1990’s.

Markets for Fine Art. Image Source: Saffronart.

With the artistic revolution of 20th Century India, the floodgates of artistic passion and innovation opened and flooded the sub-continent with their enthralling beauty. With that came artwork that could not be ignored by art historians and critics. Despite holding invaluable cultural importance, Indian artwork in the 1900’s was considered ‘decorative’ and ‘derivative’ by historians worldwide, partially due to the colonial factors and agenda influencing and downplaying the importance of such artwork in our freedom struggle. Yet all that changed in the 1990’s when Indian art was recognised for the works of genius they are considered today.

Born 1995, the commercial market for Indian Art has seen great climbs and falls, persevering, catering to its collectors and artists for the last twenty-five years. Since the turn of the millenium, the industry has led to the establishment of certain norms and unsaid courtesies which lovers of art - artists, collectors, galleries, and auction houses alike - must follow to maintain the decorum and sanctity of their passion. In this article I shall explore how the commercial world of Indian art rose from the ashes and left its mark on a world that had once buried it.

The Indian Art Industry

Birth and Evolution

Pre-1990, the market for Indian artwork on a domestic and international scale was virtually non-existent. This was because no great value or significance was assigned to Indian art produced post 1900. Art historians and critics considered the artwork to be derivative i.e. artwork influenced by mythologies and traditional influences were considered “parochial and out of touch,” while those that attempted the combination of Western techniques and styles  were “accused of sacrificing their traditional identities”, in turn establishing that India’s art history ended with the beginning of its colonisation in the 20th century. Thus, all art post-1900 was labelled ‘decorative’ and categorised as such with other works from the same category: keeping the value of such art low.

The role of South Asian galleries was diluted at the time as well. Their lack of specialising in favoured artists or movements did not have the influential effect that galleries in Western nations did: introducing and explaining the stylistic evolution of modern artistic careers, styles, and movements.This primarily because of the lack of infrastructure and formal training that existed within galleries of the time. While places of art and creation were painted with rebellion, colonial agendas often destroyed artistic agencies and stifled freedom of expression. All these conditions changed in the 1990’s.

The birth of the industry began in the 1990’s with the reconceptualisation of 20th-century Indian art. Terming it ‘modernist’, art historians and critics recanted their previous characterisations of Indian art as ‘provincial’ and ‘ derivative’, stating that such judgements rose from a Western restricted definition of ‘modernism’. Going on to say that Indian Modernism was an unique artistic movement due to its combination of traditional Indian elements and international influences, they further stipulated that as the art had been misrepresented, it was also economically undervalued. It was therefore reclassified as ‘fine art’, leading to an increased perception of it being aesthetically and economically more valuable.

Taking advantage of the movement, auction houses such as Saffronart, Christie's, Sotheby's, Phillips, and Bonhams translated the reclassification and the changing attitude of academics into simpler points. This enabled a wider audience - artists, galleries, and buyers -  to understand modern Indian art, its finer points, and what made it valuable thus creating an environment for the stable market exchange of the art.

Mukti Khaire and R. Daniel Wadhwani in their paper say that:

“Unlike the previous mixed auctions held by Sotheby’s and Christie’s from 1995 to 2000, Saffronart’s exhibitions and auctions attempted to explain 20th-century Indian art as a category to prospective collectors. As one reporter described a Saffronart exhibition, the show “examines various aspects of the development of contemporary Indian art, in terms of the aesthetics, the development of particular artists, their thematic threads, and the rise of a modernist movement that coincided with the independence of India in 1947” (Datta, 2002). Such explanations helped collectors and other observers understand both the identity of the category and the relative position and value of particular artworks and artists within it (Caves, 2000). Starting in 2002–03, Sotheby’s and Christie’s too began publishing descriptions and explanations of the aesthetic significance of 20th-century Indian artworks that referred to their positions within the emerging category.”

How it works: post-1995 and the current scenario

It was fascinating to hear the gavel in the movies where members of high gathered to bid on pieces of art. Not quite understanding the importance of the inconceivable numbers being stipulated, I always wondered why people would put so much money on a work of art. I am sure all of us at some point or another questioned ourselves as to why art sells for such high figures, and why people are so driven to procure pieces of art. To understand the why, we must first look at how the market works.

The art industry comprises a primary and secondary market. As shown in the figure below, the primary market deals with transactions the artist has directly with a buyer or in the case of being represented by a gallery, deals with transactions with the buyer through the gallery / dealer. These transactions deal with the first sale of the artwork in question and do not diverge from there.

The secondary market deals with resale of artwork and deals with transactions from buyer to buyer or from buyer to gallery / auction house / dealer to buyer.

In 1995, collectors or buyers of art who had bought Indian modernist art at the low prices of decorative pieces suddenly had the opportunity to liquidate their art assets and receive a greater turnover in profit if sold to auction houses. The option of selling to auction houses also opened up many avenues of profitable business for Indian collectors rather than procuring / selling to or through galleries. This firmly establishes the reality that there is a greater value in the secondary market in terms of currency spent on artwork and how it is valued. This is because if we were to compare the priorities of the primary and secondary market, we would find some stark differences. Namely, the primary market focuses on advertising and promoting the artist and their art, thus helping the artist gain traction in the industry and become settled as an established artist.

The secondary market capitalises on the reputation and value of the artwork of well-known artists and aims to increase the value of artwork, feeding the profit-incentives of auction houses and dealers. The public price of the artworks, in these cases are often taken as benchmarks and then improved on, depending on the strength of the desire of a buyer to buy the artwork.

The existence of public prices comes with its own pros and cons. It is highly beneficial for collectors of art who have artworks of artists no longer living. In cases where the artist is well renowned, the collector can sell the artwork for the most recent public price or for an even higher amount, depending on the artwork. Concurrently, it is highly problematic for art galleries of contemporary artists. As contemporary art is relatively new, chances are that its artists are not well established in the many circles of the art world, which can lead to extreme price fluctuations: being resold for less than its value at auction right up until the time the artist is well established.

The monetary value of art in the industry is wildly unpredictable. Buyers, if and when they have the means, will always buy a piece of art that they are greatly emotionally invested in buying, and thus set the bid / price for a piece of art on the basis of that emotional investment and need. This results in greatly varying prices for the same or similar pieces of artwork when sales are looked over an extensive timeline. More often than not, the value of the art does not depend on the reputation of the artist but the emotional response of the audience to a work of art, with the success of the sale depending on marketing the art to the right audience. Furthermore, the relatively small size of the art market in India - a maximum population of 2000 people - value of art lies in the secondary market, and banks on the trend in today’s age that contemporary art is spent on more than its worth on the open market.

With such a selected population comprising the art market, the dynamics of relationships and commercial deals change, taking on forms completely different from the norm. In Part 3, I shall explore the many stakeholders that populate the commercial world of Indian Art and the unsaid courtesies they must follow to maintain the delicate balance business that comes with commercial relationships.