*** This version of Confluence is for testing only and contains a copy of content from June 29th 2026. No changes will be preserved. ***
...
| Panel |
|---|
Vincent Anthony Falkiewicz Damien Hirst's marketing strategy behind his "Beautiful Inside My Head Forever" sale at Sotheby's was indeed well thought out and seemingly well planned. He always had the "think big (Hansen 2)" mentality, derived from British advertiser Charles Saatchi. His intention was to reach out to the masses of the art world. He strove to go beyond collectors and museums, and have his art circulate through the millions of citizens interested in buying art for their own personal reasons. This idea, though valiant, fell far short of success for a few reasons. However, in my opinion he did not necessarily over-market or over-produce his work; his timing was significantly horrible though. Had the market crash of 2008 not taken place, thousands of people would have continued to buy new art. The crash took a lot of players out of the game at a time when Hirst was trying to reach the general public. This is where his overproduction came into play. He increased supply as demand decreased; simple economics. This hurt his future sales too and will continue to hurt them deeper into the future. Now that people are re-entering the art market, Hirst's art is not considered rare by any means. This further hinders his ability to sell his works as rarity of art or an artist's work is a large factor in the worth of a piece. People do still like his work though, which will bode well for him if enough buyers re-enter the art market. If his supply and demand chain can once again find an equillibrium he will be able to produce more art at a higher price. So, Hirst's days in the art world are not necessarily numbered, he may just have to wait some time before his art becomes valuable again. |
| Panel | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Erica Gilbert-Levin
I can only speculate about what this development might mean for the art market and the art world. It is possible that efforts to make art accessible to wider audiences render the art less buy-worth among elites, which would discourage artists and dealers from wanting to make such efforts. But Hirst's factory-style approach is not the only avenue available for increasing public accessibility, so I believe it would be too hasty to blame his decline on popularity and dismiss all other efforts to expose more people to art. Maybe this is where smaller-scale, independent art production and sale comes in; the promulgation of boutiques in New York's Chelsea District, with their open-to-the-public approach, seem to be proving that public accessibility and profitability are not always at odds. And (of course I would have to mention this) emerging forms of art that are by definition about public exposure, such as graffiti and street art, are experiencing a dramatic increase in success on the art market.
|
...