Fine Art Auction Follies

Post by **sensei** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:12 pm

Those of us interested in the debated issue of "how much is our animation art really worth" might be interested in this New York Times article. The gist is that people taking cruises are often drawn into "auctions" featuring jen-you-wine prints and lithos by major 20th-century artists such as Picasso, Peter Max, and Salvador Dali, and drop $10K-$30K for items that actually appraise at around $500-$1000 if they are are in fact authentic, which many are not.

The NYT's conclusion: "For the cruise-ship companies, fine art auctions have become a revenue source like any other concession. For the passengers the auctions are a popular form of onboard entertainment, like gambling."

Animation art, of course, is the blue-collar cousin of fine art, as its appeal is possessing an intrinsically beautiful object made of essentially worthless raw material (paint, plastic) and valuable only because it is 1) unique (no other exactly like it), and 2) significant (part of an important anime series and/or part of a memorable scene). And we too have to rely on our knowledge of what we're getting and how much items like it have gone for to determine if we've gotten a good deal or got stuck.

But I think it's the cream of the jest that these cruise passengers are laying out outrageous prices, even by fine art standards, for prints -- the equivalent of repro cels and settei -- rather than for original art. At least a well-done fake painting is the result of some hours of careful, mind-directed skilled labor. A print or litho just involves hitting the press button and running off a bunch more as the market demands. (Plus, in the case of the Dali's, putting a pencil in an Autopen machine and doing a hundred or so "signatures" on the COAs.)

(And don't get me started on Thomas Kinkaid's amazing "lithograph on canvas" items, some of which I saw in a gallery in Dublin last week, as jaw-droppingly overpriced as ever.)

Sensei hugs his essentially worthless but 100% genuine Tonde Buurin cels.

Cloud · Post by **Cloud** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:13 pm

I am not trying to get him or her started on Thomas Kinkaid's amazing lithograph on canvas items some of which he or she saw in a gallery in Dublin last week as jaw-droppingly overpriced as ever.

Keropi · Post by **Keropi** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:18 pm

I read a short article in a catalog around 1993-1995 that mentioned anime cels in passing. Mostly it discussed animation cels you could buy from cartoons for around $200-$300, but in a couple sentences it said something about people being able to get anime production cels for around $25 to $45.

The difficult part was finding a physical location or a mailing catalog that had them. Not easy.

Cloud · Post by **Cloud** » Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:18 pm

I don't think I've read that. Can you give me a reference?

Drac of the Sharp Smiles · Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:19 pm

Even speaking as someone who spends big dollars on "worthless pieces of plastic", I find it amazing that people will spend TENS OF THOUSANDS on something as generic as a print. (Want more? Just roll the press for longer... Yes, I know this isn't quite the case, but still.) More even than that, they will spend that kind of money for something about which they have done NO research!! This strikes me as the height of stupidity.

Before I get shot down by print lovers... I actually do have a print which cost me hundreds and have been tempted by others in the past. However, I just think the value of something that has 500+ exact copies is limited. (In the case of the one I have, it was a print run of 2500!)

Post by **sensei** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 8:10 am

There's an anthropological distinction between "allographic" collectables, which exist as several, equally "authentic" objects, and "autographic" collectables, which are totally one-of-a-kind. Baseball cards are good examples of allographic collectables, even when they are extremely rare and desirable (think 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle, or Pete Rose rookie card).

Autographs, you might think, would be the other kind, but with sports collectables there are so many autographing events that even these signatures become another flavor of allographic. And shikishi fill this same gray middle ground in our realm, since even when they're done at cons, they are signed in the kind of assembly-line process that we're familiar with. (The most appreciated, of course, are the ones that, thanks to the artist's courtesy, are most individualized to the collector.) I see that there are an increasing number of sites focusing on the sale of these items. And I'd expect that, as with sports autographs, the authenticity of these shikishi will be more and more suspect the more often they are resold rather than personally obtained.

And then there are the truly autographic items: Shoeless Joe Jackson's bat; "the" home run ball that so-and-so hit to win such-and-such a game; "the" glove that so-and-so used to catch "that" World Series game. All these are manufactured goods, of course, but their actual use in the history of baseball makes them collectors' holy grails.

You can, after all, get a perfectly good poster of Van Gogh's "Sunflowers" that will look nearly as good on your wall. For a little more, you can get a good artist to do a copy of it that will look even better. But of course the one that was on the easel in front of the man himself and holds his own creative brushstrokes is the one that will command the $39M pricetag.

Anthropologist Mary Douglas notes that this distinction has also been applied to religious rituals that, in some rites, relies on their being performed by a priest with the proper credentials, while in other sects any devout believer can perform such acts. Has your kid been properly baptised? Might make a difference if St. Peter tries to read his titles clear at the heavenly gates and points out that the person who did the splashing wasn't part of the Apostolic Succession. (Lots of collectors say what they do feels like religion anyhow.)

"Control is at stake in both issues," Douglas notes, and so autographic objects and actions are more strongly felt to be owned by certain people (1994: 14-15).

RoboFlonne · Post by **RoboFlonne** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:55 pm

Drac of the Sharp Smiles wrote:Even speaking as someone who spends big dollars on "worthless pieces of plastic", I find it amazing that people will spend TENS OF THOUSANDS on something as generic as a print. (Want more? Just roll the press for longer... Yes, I know this isn't quite the case, but still.) More even than that, they will spend that kind of money for something about which they have done NO research!! This strikes me as the height of stupidity.

He was surprised to find artworks by Picasso and Rembrandt in the auction area, a lounge near the casino, where they were greeted with Champagne. He gravitated toward the Picassos.

Lol... First they fill you up with Alcohol until you're drunk!!! That's the trick...

Cloud · Post by **Cloud** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:55 pm

And? How do you know? Should it be quite the case but still?

RoboFlonne · Post by **RoboFlonne** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:57 pm

Cloud wrote:And? How do you know? Should it be quite the case but still?

Why, Cloud! I know what you know, you know what I know... You know what I mean?

Cloud · Post by **Cloud** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:57 pm

Deductive reasoning. What.

RoboFlonne · Post by **RoboFlonne** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:58 pm

Cloud wrote:Deductive reasoning. What.

Yes, Cloud! Deductive reasoning!!

Cloud · Post by **Cloud** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:58 pm

Didn't you understand it?

RoboFlonne · Post by **RoboFlonne** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:59 pm

Cloud wrote:Didn't you understand it?

Yes, Cloud! The most important part of understanding is listening!!

Cloud · Post by **Cloud** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:59 pm

"it" being gif[img]?

RoboFlonne · Post by **RoboFlonne** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:00 pm

Cloud wrote:"it" being gif

Cloud! I said you should be listening!!!