The side effects of Tehran auction on artists' livelihood; what is behind the price increase?

Saeed Fallahfar, an artist and art researcher, warned that in the absence of independent evaluation, the works present in the Tehran auction will have an exaggerated position and the absent works will find an insignificant position in the narrative of contemporary art history.

Saeed Fallahfar, an artist, critic and art researcher, in a conversation with Mehr reporter, in evaluating the Tehran auction and its relationship with the boom in the art economy, said: Analyzing or criticizing the Tehran auction without knowing the nature of this economy and structure is the same thing that has been abundantly said and written in emotional, one-dimensional and superficial comments. Both "economy" is a scientific and complex phenomenon, and culture and art are made up of many layers. It is not possible to know these categories without a clear understanding of these complexities, dependencies, connections and its influential layers. He saw and magnified one aspect of it and opened the language to criticize or admire it without referring to its other effects. Tehran auction is an artistic and cultural event and at the same time, industry and business, which should be subject to the principles and rules of the market and economy like any other transaction.

He said: But all the worries start from the point where we want to expect the benefits of both aspects without adhering to the principles of each. The problem starts from the point where we expect and hope for genuine artistic and cultural trends from an economic activity or we assume that culture and art are aligned with loyalty for business. The problem is when the curators of culture and art use the economic statistics of the auction to show the prosperity and progress of art or to support artists and help the artists' livelihood, or financial concerns are hidden behind serving culture and art.

Falahfar clarified: The problem is to imagine that the proceeds of the Tehran auction will go directly into the artists' pockets, or at least give a large share to the artists. Especially since the majority of the transferred financial figure is not related to the flow of art day or to imagine that all artists necessarily have the possibility and ability to freely participate in this auction.

He further explained: On the other hand - although one cannot deny the necessity and benefits of economic prosperity in the field of art - it is obvious that the increase in the price of works of art is not always and under any circumstances in the interest of all artists and artistic flow in different parts of the society. Especially, the effectiveness of this component in the Tehran auction is not proportional to the possibility of participation of all tastes and all categories of art.

This art expert further explained about the increase in the price of works of art: the increase in the price of works in the auction may actually mean the withdrawal of capital, a kind of price confusion and disruption in smaller markets, and as a result, the income of a wide range of artists will decrease. Illusions should be added to these. The least effect of this case, economic fattening and the desire to get fat (even if it is superficial) can gradually marginalize the nature of art. Economic power and attraction, if not timely and with knowledge, may turn art into a luxury and featureless commodity for trade or credit transfer of money and capital.

He stated: "Tehran's auction may isolate artists who do not comply with its rules." To drag works of art from the heart of the society into the aristocratic circles and assemblies and collections far from reach. The Tehran auction, intentionally or unintentionally, has formed an unprecedented relationship for galleries and artists, which deserves further investigation.

This art expert said: We cannot deny the influence of the connection between galleries and Tehran auction on the credibility and success of a large number of galleries. As far as the critics believe, many galleries have completely replaced their cultural and artistic role in the city with the economic role and mediation for the Tehran auction.

He said: achieving economic success forces the Tehran auction, like most examples of the art market, to focus on established works of art and established artists. For example, the artists who were known as leading artists in the past few decades and perhaps with their works and exhibitions, have repeatedly challenged the tranquility and peace of the cultural, social and artistic atmosphere of the society. Imagine what courage it takes to hold an exhibition with impressionism and abstract works in the flower and chicken society, and what kind of reactions it follows or what kind of relationship it establishes with the economy. What kind of reactions did the entry of art into the galleries cause, but by moving away from the original and innovative atmosphere of that time, the display of the works of these artists no longer represents those social emotions with the same quality as in the past.

Fallahfar stated: "Instead, we can see how these artists have gained more fame and value by attending art events and different markets today." Young artists are also present in the auction, and despite their youth, their works belong to this group and the current status of their works. If not; Either they are exceptions or other reasons should be sought for their presence in this market. This simple rule is enough that we cannot consider the Tehran auction or any large art market with significant sales figures as the leader of today's artistic trends in a realistic analysis. Especially, the emergence of a group of artistic actions as "contemporary art" deepens the differences in this equation.

He did not consider the Iranian society to be familiar with the structure of the auction and the market of buying and selling works of art and stated: This society gets excited when it hears some big figures; It doesn't matter how these figures compare to foreign samples or how big or small money they are compared to the movement of money in the sector, for example, housing and property. It is important that these numbers are unprecedented in the eyes of the public and even for some artists.

This art critic and expert explained: The result of these emotions, other than emotional comments, is the replacement of the price of artworks in this auction with the real values ​​of the artwork. As a result, the works that are not present in this auction for any reason, in the eyes of the public and unfortunately in the eyes of many artists and even academics and critics, and as a result, in the report of the history of contemporary art, they do not have a place in the history of contemporary art.

Stating that there are many examples, he said: prices that cannot be evaluated, controlled and verified due to the absence of a market equivalent to an auction. Perhaps the reason for many rumors and suspicions around the auction came from here. This lack of parallel markets is also one of those features that does not allow to easily compare the Tehran auction with seemingly similar Western structures; At the same time, cultural differences and differences in economic and artistic infrastructure reject this analogy. Such a position has the potential and the possibility of setting false prices, registering fake and fictitious transactions. A taste can take works out of the economic cycle or take an artist under its wings.

In the end, Falahfar stated: This potential possibility can be the beginning of many doubts. Moreover, some critics have not considered the news about the plan to pledge works of art to obtain bank loans unrelated to some of the price increases in the recent auction period.