$23.8 Million Steel Sculpture Sets Another Auction Record

[Merlion]

I just got this news. You can see a photo of it in this NYTimes article. For full details, click into the URL address.

-----------------------------------------------------------
$23.8 Million Steel Sculpture Sets Another Auction Record

A monumental steel sculpture by the American artist David Smith became the most expensive work of contemporary art ever sold at auction last night when Larry Gagosian, the Manhattan dealer, fought off five aggressive bidders and paid $23.8 million at Sotheby's.

Being a big spender required some effort: Mr. Gagosian's competitors hung on well into the double-digit-millions. All were hoping to own "CUBI XXVIII" (1965), the last of the artist's renowned Cubi series. The catalog designated it as "Property of a Texas Foundation," but before the sale experts identified the foundation as that of the Texas oil heir and financier Sid Bass,.

The reason for the high price was plain to lovers of contemporary art: this elegantly composed melding of boxes and columns may be the last example of the series to come on the market for some time. Most of the others are in museums or collections where they will stay for generations. So this last-chance opportunity was irresistible, which is why the sculpture's final price was nearly double its high estimate, $12 million. [snip]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/10/arts/design/10sothebys.html

[fused]

I have been an admirer of the sculpture of David Smith for many years and it is often a pleasant surprise to encounter unseen works when travelling... Storm King in NY, the National Gallery in DC, the Nasher and Menil Collections in TX and many more all have great Smith sculptures in their collections.

Nice to see his value in the "financial validation of art" world keeping pace with his contemporaries and other modernists, even though the CUBI series has never been my favorite group of work. Seeing this astronomical price paid at auction for this sculpture --is this considered alchemy?-- I have to wonder what the original price of this work was when it was first sold many years ago.

[beyond1]

I tried to view this sculpture and from my understanding it

would cost me $200. Is that right?

[beyond1]

dear fused,
I clicked on the wrong icon and made a mistake.I was trying to say
the original David Smith CUBI probably sold for 5-10 K

[arcdawg]

thats a ton of money. I like smiths work but DAMNNN !

guess I have to start raising my prices ;)

dawg

[bluedogshuz]

Well,
It just goes to show that worthless and priceless are just words. :)

[arcdawg]

Well,
It just goes to show that worthless and priceless are just words. :)



I like that !

dawg

[fused]

Just words with strongly opinionated implications.
Worthless = no monetary value and Priceless = irreplacable value beyond monetary measure.

Which doesn't take into account that one person's trash is another person's treasure.

[boback]

I think it's wonderful. It is nice to see an early-icon of the Abstract American Sculpture movement getting the monitary respect it has deserved and Smith deserved. I wish he was here to comment.

But: what do Yall think this means for the prices of our work?

[Merlion]

I think it's wonderful. It is nice to see an early-icon of the Abstract American Sculpture movement getting the monitary respect it has deserved and Smith deserved. I wish he was here to comment.

David Smith died years ago and couldn't be there to benefit from or even to witness the sale. And I think that's the point.

The sale at these fantastic prices are after the artists died. Although there are exceptions, very often the artists got only a fraction of these amounts when they first sell them off.

I just wonder, who are the exceptional rich artists, and what are their stories ?

[boback]

Often the Artist gets no sales and no incouragement to continue. They really have to have a hole in their belly that pushes them along. A hole that they keep trying to fill. The artist you are are looking for are the one that are still working.

[Merlion]

This is another article (http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/03/features/dsmith.php) about David Smith and his sculptures. It is by Holland Cotter of the New York Times talking about "David Smith: A Centennial" at the Solomon R Guggenheim Museium in New York through May 14.

I cut and paste some excerpts below.

David Smith: Sculpture of tough grace and wit

.... The sculptor David Smith, the biggest palooka of the Abstract Expressionist crowd, floated lines of welded steel in space the way Eleanor Steber sang Mozart's notes, with an unbaroque fineness, an American-style delicacy.

For proof, I refer you to "David Smith: A Centennial" at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York through May 14. It is one of the most beautifully judged displays of American Modernism I've seen in years. Even people cool to Smith's art - I've always felt nitpicky about it - will agree that he puts a best foot forward here.

Smith is one of those artists best known for his worst work, in his case bulky sculptures of the "important" kind that museums and banks like to buy. Carmen Gimenez, the Guggenheim's curator, seems not to share their taste. And like any great editor, which is basically what a great curator is, she has been bold in deciding what should go. In this first Smith survey since 1982, two late series, "Zigs" (1961) and "Circles" (1962), are practically absent, and are not missed.

Delightfully, however, all but one of the 1955 "Forging" series have been brought together and given a space of their own. Skinny and straight, they're like a grove of winter saplings, cuttings from Giacometti. The "Medals of Dishonor" (1939-40), the only body of overtly political work this professedly anticapitalist artist ever made, is present, too. [snip]

(P.S. I'm afraid I don't quite follow Holland Cotter's flowerly prose. Perhaps my English is not good enough. :p )

[fused]

David Smith at the Guggenheim: A Centennial (http://www.guggenheim.org/smith/highlights1.html)February 3 - May 14

If you ask why I make sculpture, I must answer that it is my way of life, my balance,
and my justification for being. —David Smith

[JAZ]

This looks to be a terrific show.
JAZ

[fused]

Only two weeks left to see David Smith: A Centennial (http://www.artcritical.com/gelber/EGSmith.htm).

[anne (bxl)]

[QUOTE=Merlion]This is another article (http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/03/features/dsmith.php) about David Smith and his sculptures. It is by Holland Cotter of the New York Times talking about "David Smith: A Centennial" at the Solomon R Guggenheim Museium in New York through May 14.

For european who are interrested, this exhibition will be presented in Beaubourg (Paris) from june till august, and somewhere in London from september till january .

[romanelli]

it is that world record or Brancusi`s Golden bird"? I think this romanian hold the record.

[anne (bxl)]

it is that world record or Brancusi`s Golden bird"? I think this romanian hold the record.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/4516303.stm

[romanelli]

With $27,456,000 the "Bird in space" of Brancusi still hold the world record. In romanian this sculpture is known as "Cocos sarutand cerul" or "Pasare sarutand cerul", wich means "Bird kissing the sky". They are so expensive because only few sculptures of him are in private space, after he made a massive donation to french country. First he made a donation proposal to Romania, but the crazy comunists from `50s they reffused those "abstract things". But any way, we hold here in romania some work of him, in museums, wich are his early works.
His master pice remains the "Coloana infinitului", wich means "Endless column, or infimity" 40m, in Targu Jiu City, Romania, and "Rugaciune"-"Pray" 1907 first modern sculpture in wolrd (same year with Picasso`s Demoliseles d`Avignon-first modern penture). "Pray" was made as a funeral monument, but now the original is in Romania art musseum, and in cimitere is a copy.
Sorry for my primitive english:)

[cooljamesx1]

I wonder how much some sculptures would bring IF they were sold. what if they were to put david up for auction? that would be something. I suppose this record applys only to recently-made sculpture, as some peices have value mostly because of age. but then again, things like the reputation of the artist also affect value. It seems to me that there are so many variables in what art brings at auction that price it is only loosely related to the 'quality'(however you wish to define that) of the peice. interesting.

[Merlion]

This is my 2 cents. Don't flame me. When we are talking about very high priced artworks, this is the domain of the art establishment or art elite. This term is taken to mean the special world of rich private art collectors/investors, the curators of rich art galleries/museums, the department heads/valuators of big auction houses, and the influencial art critics.

As to why some artworks command such high prices and what 'qualities' make them valued so highly, I think if pressed, the art elite may tell us that we'll not understand, and ask us to just trust them.

They'll of course not say that it is in the interest of all in the art establishment to keep the price high and continue to go upwards. All will benefit. If times are bad, the auction houses will go slow, and wait for the good times.

I understand now the 'new riches' of China, India and Russia are joining in as art collectors/investors. It is a good time. ;)

[Merlion]

Relating to this, I notice this info below about the commissions that auction houses get.

(Prices of record include Sotheby's commission: 20 percent of the first $200,000 of the hammer price and 12 percent of the rest. Estimates do not reflect commissions.)

It is taken from here (http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/visualarts/ArtMarket/NYT-Sothebys-AuctionResults-Nov-2005.html).

Based on a rough calculation, if the sculpture was auctioned off at $23.8, Southerby would receive a cool $2.8 m. Not bad.

I remember sometime ago the two largest auction houses, Sotherby and Christies, were taken to court for colluding to set price. I forgot what was the verdict.

[fused]

Another curious direction for this thread to take might be the price paid to living artists for their work. We keep hearing of record ammounts paid for art at auction houses, but the artists of origin are long out of the picture. Basically what we get are art investors selling their holdings to finance other endeavors, such as entertainment magnate David Geffen --who may have an interest in purchasing the Los Angeles Times-- selling a Jackson Pollock, Jasper Johns and Willem de Kooning for $143,500,000.

I'm curious what the best price paid to a living contemporary sculptor might be. I know many works --like the "Cloud Gate" in Chicago-- have huge price tags ($20+ million) but much of that cost goes to the actual fabricators of the work.

What is the biggest price actually paid to a living artist for their work?

[Merlion]

Highest prices paid to living sculptors? Perhaps you can look around for commission or selling prices paid to Damien Hirst, Richard Serra, Anish Kapoor, Dale Chihuly, Antony Gormley, and the sculptors making gigantic statues. Who are the other 'big' sculptors?

A part of these commission prices are expenses for construction/casting, installation and transportation. But of course big names can ask for high fees.

I think some of these commission prices can go up when the actual expenses go up over the years before artwork completion. Anybody has knowledge of this?

[Bill Harsey]

David Smith was a knuckledragging steel worker who learned his craft from guys even harder and dirtier than him.
I worry about looking at his work, not the dollars paid for it on later markets but this discussion is still interesting.

I really like what David did, how he did it and what he stood for.

Edited to add: after posting this I started some work in the shop and figured out what I wanted to say just a bit more clearly, I like it when art is itself and nothing else. Money always makes it something else.