“There has never been a first-rank woman artist.”


So says the critic Brian Sewell, and the art market seems to agree, with men’s work commanding millions more at auction. By Andrew Johnson

I think Sarah Thronton made the best point in this article when she explained, “You cannot equate the monetary value of art with the aesthetic worth of the artist. One would expect the art world to be more egalitarian. It was only in 2004 that a living woman, Marlene Dumas, broke through the $1m barrier. At the top end of the market, the people who can afford to spend a lot are entrepreneurial men. And they buy entrepreneurial artists – Warhol, Hirst, Koons – artists they perhaps identify with. Second, it’s about volume. Women don’t tend to have factories of assistants churning out work. If you want to boost an artist’s price you need to bring their work to auction again and again. Women don’t usually work in that way.”

If I were a multi-millionaire, I would probably buy pieces from artists I identify with as well, but I wouldn’t exclusively purchase art by women. Interesting article. Interesting to see that there remain to be ignorant people in the art world.

God I love these ladies.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

1 Comment

  1. Posted March 6, 2011 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

    Have you read Linda Nochlin’s 1971 essay “Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?” Just read it. I would be curious to what you think of her essay. thx


Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *