INTERNATIONAL CONTEMPORARY ART FAIRS IN A ‘GLOBALIZED’ ART MARKET

ABSTRACT

This article examines the participation of art galleries at international contemporary art fairs (ICAFs) to evaluate what theories of cultural globalisation best describe this type of practice. For that purpose, it draws upon recent and original statistical data in order to examine the geographical distribution of major ICAFs worldwide, that is, their concentration in selected geographical locations, as well as the country of origin of the galleries participating in these events. This is intended to map out the workings of any territorial forms of dominance affecting the art market, seen both in the capability of a given country to organise one or more ICAFs and in that of art galleries to participate in such high profile events. The article firstly reviews relevant literature on cultural globalisation to outline, and also problematise, those interpretative models that can be applied to the particular case of ICAFs. Secondly, it provides and analyses new statistical data on ICAFs and gallery participation mentioned earlier. Thirdly, it examines how this data can be interpreted with the help of current theories of cultural globalisation. It concludes by arguing that the model best explaining the territorial dynamics of ICAFs is one that incorporates a notion of both centre and semi-peripheral domination on a vast periphery of countries including both Western and non-Western countries.

Keywords:

• art fairs
• art market
• visual arts
• high culture
• globalisation
• transnational exchanges

Notes

¹I would like to thank Marta Herrero for her extensive comments on countless drafts of this article. Her advice and incisive suggestions have greatly improved the final version of this text.

²By contrast, the first contemporary art biennial, that of Venice, in Italy, dates back to 1895, and the Sao Paulo biennial in Brazil was created in 1951.

³Artprice is the world leader in art market information, most of which relates to international art auctions. In 2009, within the scope of a partnership arrangement dating back to the early 2000s we had access to exclusive data on international art fairs and participating galleries.

⁴Every year, more than 800 galleries worldwide apply to participate in Art Basel, and around 500 of these are rejected, which are, by far, the highest figures for a contemporary art fair. To be able to apply, galleries have to present a file introducing the gallery and its artists, and the project of their booth at the fair. A selection committee composed of art world experts, high proportions of whom are gallery owners (or curators), decides whether to accept or reject such applications.

⁵While US galleries predominate in fairs organised in America (40% at Art Basel Miami and 41% at New York's Armory Show, 71% at Art Chicago, or at smaller shows: 61% at Palm Beach Art Fair, 75% at the Outsider Art Fair and even 99% at the Art Show), these are generally more reluctant to travel to Europe. In 2008, US galleries, (and not necessarily the most prestigious ones), only accounted for 13% of exhibitors at FIAC Paris and Artforum Berlin, 9% at ARCO Madrid, or a mere 4% at Art Cologne and 3% at the Bologna Art Fair.

⁶This insight comes from David Halle and Elisabeth Tiso's research in progress on contemporary art galleries in the New York district of Chelsea (to be published in 2013 by Chicago University Press).

⁷In a similar vein, Sapiro (2008) distinguished ‘peripheral’ from ‘central’ languages when analysing international cultural exchanges in publishing, especially through translated works, in order to point up inequalities in the system of international exchanges.

⁸It must be noted that Chinese art fairs were partially included in the population by adhering to the logic used to broaden the profiles of the actors represented. China plays a more leading role in the auction market for fine art.

⁹These also reflect our wish to broaden the national profiles of our data population.

¹⁰See Femke van Hest (2012).

¹¹Other represented countries are, in decreasing order, China (2.6% of participating galleries), Belgium (2.1%), Austria (2.0%), Taiwan (1.9%), South Korea and Argentina (1.7% each), Portugal (1.5), Singapore (1.1%) and Brazil (1.0%). Mexico, Russian Federation, India, Denmark, Israel, New Zealand, Sweden, Poland, North Korea, Indonesia, Greece, Luxemburg, Ireland, Hong Kong, Hungary, Finland and Thailand, ranked in decreasing order from 0.7 to 0.2%. Turkey, Philippines, Slovenia, Columbia, Vietnam, Romania, Norway, Porto Rico, Venezuela, Chile, Uruguay, Peru, Czech Republic, Monaco, Malaysia, South Africa and United Arab Emirates all weigh 0.1% each. Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Tunisia, Iceland, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Serbia & Montenegro and Islamic Republic of Iran all weigh … 0.05% each only.

¹²The European Union as a whole accounts for 43.1% of participating galleries and thus we can see that the influence of this economic and political entity is concentrated among just a handful of its members.

¹³Artists from these two countries occupy pre-dominant positions on the international contemporary art scene (Quemin 2002a, 2006).