Academic Identity
I am assistant professor of Sociology at Barnard College. My book (and my dissertation research) is a comparative study of technology and futures trading, an ethnography of open outcry and electronic traders. My current research is on how art specialists price cultural commodities, particularly how categories and commensuration work in the secondary/resale fine arts market. I teach courses in economic sociology, organizations, and gender.
Professional Identity
I occasionally consult, focusing on organizational change, the future of technology and financial markets, and environmental markets. I do strategic assessments of markets, technology and organizational design, with qualitative and quantitative components. If you are interested, please email me.
Personal Identity
I grew up outside Chicago, and went to school(s) at Wesleyan University, USC, and Northwestern University. I currently live in New York, with a partner who is a marketing manager for an educational nonprofit. I love movies, like to cook, and I can do a mean lindy swing out. I am INTP.
January 7, 2009
Contemporary art, content, prices
Filed under: Art, Markets — Peter @ 8:19 am
There is a wonderful discussion of the subtle differences between modern/contemporary figurative artists over at Illustration Art. Figurative art in this case being nudes (so if you are offended by high art nudes, move on).
The crux of the issue is the difference between Adrian Gottlieb and Job Currin. The former artist is, arguably, technically superior to the latter, and yet Currin’s paintings routinely sell for a couple orders of magnitude more than Gottlieb’s. IMHO, the difference rests in Currin’s engagement with a perspective (sure, call this postmodern self-referential irony if you like), while Gottlieb’s interest is in making art that feels powerful in its representation of women’s form and leaves it at that. Why the first is fancy high art and the second is merely technical illustration is an excellent question.
Once you start to try to gauge the art world by making arguments over the content of the art itself, you may find yourself with very few solid foundations – this is the insight from Howard Becker’s Art World’s (among others). But there is something about the willingness to argue over art content and not just art conventions that feels meatier and healthier than the more distanced sociological approach (an approach I often take myself and find completely useful, to be honest).
In addition to the wonderful comparison in the post, read the comments, moderated by IA’s David Apatoff. They are for the most part thoughtful and extend the thinking of the original post – something comments don’t often do.
Comments (0)Leave a Reply
This site is hand-woven, and heavily borrows from the wonderful blueprint framwork. Rock on, grids!
Not quite
, but getting there..