沃霍尔于1978年在工作室作画。解散认证委员会已经引起了人们对未来市场的争议。
当有些人担心关闭认证委员会的负面影响时，也有人说它的作用是完全多余的。
安迪沃霍尔的作品预计本月（11月7-9日）被搬上纽约当代艺术拍卖中心的舞台。估价在1.14亿美元的艺术品将被出售，其中包括49件作品价格在20,000美元至1900万美元不等；沃霍尔作品将代表傍晚11％拍品的出售情况。在新经济衰退的担忧正在逼近的时候，其成功或失败将成为当代市场健康的晴雨表。
然而，自安迪·沃霍尔基金会宣布将于2012年年初解散正版认证委员会以来，在本月的沃霍尔测试中还是有一个转折。
因其有争议的决定而受到抨击的委员会，在过去的16年间一直扮演着沃霍尔作品认证泰斗的角色。有些人担心其关闭的负面影响。
让“沃霍尔市场顺其自然吧”，ArtTactic的创始人和总经理安德斯（Anders Petterson）这样说。“这条船太大至很难让它自由浮动”。虽然事实上委员会做出的决定的经常遭到批评，但是它扮演的是一个复杂市场的主持人的角色，他们通过大的生产量、“挪用基本技术”广泛应用、艺术家参与作品的不同程度描述市场的特征。
虽然“举动是必然以事业中的短期一些混乱的市场型”，苏富比拍卖行欧洲副主席和其当代艺术高级国际专家奥利弗·巴克尔（Oliver Barke）说，他认为关闭的最终“更主要是不便，而不是巨大的商业灾难”。
Green Car Crash
事实上在拍卖会上出售的前五件沃霍尔的作品未被委员会加印记，包括Green Car Crash（绿色焚烧着的汽车1），1963年作，2007年纽约佳士德售价7170万元（估价2500万－3500万美元），此事表明了收藏家不一定因缺少官方的认可而却步 。“有时候他们问作品是否已通过认证，但更多的处于百合烫金的目的，而不是其销售或商业价值的关键”，佳士得战后和当代艺术部门国际负责人、主席布雷特（Brett Gorvy）说。本月销售的49件作品中，只有16件已经被前委员会认证过。
然而，创最高记录的所有作品在艺术家的描述图录里都有详细记录。沃霍尔基金会已经完成了三卷目录，记录了直到1974年的绘画和雕塑。该基金会将继续审查列入在未来版本中提交的作品，但时间则由自己定（不像认证委员会那样根据请求）。“我们的主要目的是为了学术而不是市场。我们不打算承担一切风险、做全部工作并承担一切诉讼，”基金会总经理乔尔（Joel Wachs）如是说。
作于1960－1965年最获利的一批作品已被编目，其价值因此将不受认证委员会关闭而有所影响。据四月ArtTactic报告，这一时期的作品在过去的十年间约占了沃霍尔市场的54%，而在2010年则占到了65％的市场份额。
预计会有“至少有三本以上（版画图录）20世纪70年代、四本（版画图录）20世纪80年代，至少有一本绘画图录，我们甚至还没有拿到照片”，乔尔说。“无论作品是否被收录到将来的图录里，描述目录要告知人们的速度都非常关键”。而且目前前几册图录是否会有任何补充的问题还不清楚，麦克劳克林－斯特恩律师事务所（the law firm McLaughlin & Stern）的彼得（Peter）说。
乔尔估计将大约需要20年才能完成这个项目。市场对等待出自晚期的作品将如何反应还是不确定的，不过通常会被认为是冷门作品。虽然20世纪60年代的作品引领市场，值得注意的是2010年5月苏富比纽约拍卖1986年自画像拍出3260万美元，使它成为沃霍尔拍卖（估价1000－1500万美元 ）第六昂贵的作品。ArtTactic的报告发现，这些时期的作品的需求在2010年有所增长，而20世纪80年代作品在沃霍尔画作年度拍卖销售中平均占23％。
同样，纸上作品的认证，特别是纸上丝网画可能有些“复杂”，二级市场专家克里斯托夫（Christophe Van de Weghe）说。他说绘画市场不会受大太的影响，虽然“作品出处将会比以往任何时候都更重要。当我们的经销商为客户买东西时作品出处是关键。你想知道谁展示过它、拥有过它和它背面的标签。拍卖行人士的赞成这种说法：“我们将尽自己应尽的努力——如我们要做到我们掌握的艺术家作品的99.9％的真实性，”巴克（Barker）说。
然而，沃霍尔毕竟不是其它的艺术家。他多产令人难以置信，他的一系列产出（以及随后的各种价格）允许不同类型的购买——从主要藏家购买的热门作品到适合新买家的印刷品。沃霍尔作品与美国战后在其高峰期的乐观情绪相关联，他标志式的对象和饱和式的色彩手法有一种瞬间的感染力。他的名字带有品牌的力量，这种力量超出了市场的内在小圈子和体制支持他声誉基石的强大水平，巩固他在艺术史中的地位。
同时，深厚的私人市场包括强大的支持者如穆格拉比（Mugrabi）家族，其家族拥有800多名艺术家的艺术作品，并准备着眼投资沃霍尔市场的长期兴旺发展：在2008-09年的低迷时期，穆格拉比购买的或低价竞拍的沃霍尔画作占平均总成交价值的31％，在2010年花了3680万美元拍得沃霍尔作品，以上信息来自ArtTactic。而乔斯（Jose Mugrabi）拒绝发表评论。
沃霍尔（跨越所有的媒材）的作品有超过10万件，据乔尔所说，其中只有约6600已通过认证过程。“人们把过于强调安迪的作品，而约95％沃霍尔的作品仍然被排除在外面。市场将不得不照顾好自身”。像银行一样，也许沃霍尔庞大的市场规模意味着它简直太大而不会崩溃。
有争议的决定，
董事会已经花费巨额法律费用维护其决定。去年单独支出700万美元，维护美国收藏家乔西蒙-惠兰（Joe Simon-Whelan）所引起的反垄断诉讼。他指控委员会“从事沃霍尔的作品在市场上的贸易限制和垄断的阴谋”，并宣称委员会拒绝认证他所拥有的一件已被其他专家广泛接受的真作——1964年沃霍尔的肖像。西蒙-惠兰10月份放弃了诉讼，他说他不能负担得起继续诉讼。沃霍尔基金会总裁乔尔说：“我们为每一次已带来了起诉而斗争，因为我们强烈感觉到不设置这个先例。
委员会驳回另一件来自同一系列的作品。签名并注明日期的自画像已被沃霍尔的早期画廊老板安东尼（Anthony d’Offay）所拥有，这些作品被收录在1970年“描述目录”——艺术家在莱纳科龙的常识。图录工作当时是为了艺术家工作室收集的700多件作品而做，这些作品也是安东尼给苏格兰塔特-国家画廊（Tate and National Galleries of Scotland）中的一部分礼物，其中部分作品是在2008年购得。然而，在与博物馆的讨论后，自画像最终并未包括在内。塔特当时告诉艺术新闻报：“我们同意安东尼那本书里不要包含任何作品将更好些，其中作品出处可能会受到各种质疑。然而，我们没有理由怀疑这幅画的真伪。
（作者：夏洛特Charlotte Burns）
附：原文
The problem with authenticating Warhol
While some fear the negative effects of the closure of the vetting board, others say its role was not essential
By Charlotte Burns. From News, Issue 229, November 2011
Published online: 07 November 2011
Warhol painting in the Factory in 1978. The dissolution of the authentication board has sparked debate over the future of his market
Works by Andy Warhol are due to take centre stage in this month’s contemporary art auctions in New York (7-9 November). An estimated $114m worth of art, comprising 49 works, ranging from $20,000 to $19m, will be sold; works by Warhol will represent 11% of the evening sale material. Their success, or failure, will act as a barometer for the health of the contemporary market at a time when fears of a new recession are looming.There is, though, a twist in this month’s test of the Warhol market following the announcement that the Andy Warhol Foundation will dissolve its authentication board at the beginning of 2012.
The board, which has come under fire for its controversial decisions (see box), has acted as the sole arbiter in authenticating Warhols for the past 16 years. Some fear the negative effects of its closure. It leaves “the Warhol market adrift,” says Anders Petterson, the founder and managing director of ArtTactic. “This ship is too big to be left to free float. Despite the fact that the board was often criticised for its decisions, it acted as an anchor for a complex market characterised by large production volumes, extensive use of appropriation-based techniques and various degrees of the artist’s involvement in the final product.”
While the move “is bound to cause some type of confusion in the market in the short-term”, says Oliver Barker, the deputy chairman of Sotheby’s Europe and its senior international specialist in contemporary art, he feels that the closure is ultimately “more an inconvenience than a major commercial disaster”.
The fact that none of the top five Warhol works sold at auction have been stamped by the board, including Green Car Crash (Green Burning Car I), 1963, which sold for $71.7m at Christie’s New York in 2007 (est $25m-$35m), indicates that collectors are not necessarily deterred by the lack of official approval. “Sometimes they ask whether a work has been authenticated, but more as a gilding of the lily than essential to its marketability or commercial worth,” says Brett Gorvy, the chairman and international head of Christie’s post-war and contemporary art department. Only 16 of the 49 works for sale this month have been before the board.
All of the top record-breakers are, however, detailed in the artist’s catalogue raisonné. The Warhol foundation has completed three volumes of the catalogue, documenting painting and sculpture until 1974. The foundation will continue to review works submitted for inclusion in future editions, but in its own time (unlike the authentication board, which took requests). “Our primary aim is to serve scholarship and not the market. We’re not going to have to take all the risks, do all the work and take all the lawsuits,” says Joel Wachs, the president of the foundation.
The most lucrative body of works—paintings from 1960 to 1965—has already been catalogued, and it is therefore unlikely that their value will be affected by the board’s closure. Works from this period accounted for an average of 54% of the Warhol market in the past decade, and 65% of market share in 2010, according to a report by ArtTactic in April.
It is anticipated that there will be “at least three more volumes for the 1970s, four for the 1980s, at least one for drawings and we have not even got to photographs”, says Wachs. “Much hinges on the speed with which the catalogue raisonné will inform people whether works are going to be included in the future volumes of the catalogue. And the question of whether there will be any supplementation of previous volumes is unclear,” says Peter Stern of the law firm McLaughlin & Stern.
Wachs estimates that it will take around 20 years to complete the project. How the market will react to the wait for works from the later periods, generally perceived to be less popular, is uncertain. While works from the 1960s lead the market, it is worth noting that a 1986 self-portrait sold for $32.6m at Sotheby’s New York in May 2010, making it the sixth most expensive Warhol at auction (est $10m-$15m). ArtTactic’s report found that demand for works from these periods grew during 2010, and that works from the 1980s have accounted for an average of 23% of annual auction sales for Warhol paintings.
Equally, the authentication of works on paper, notably silkscreens on paper, could be “complicated”, says secondary market specialist Christophe Van de Weghe, who says that the paintings market will be little affected, although “provenance will be more important than ever. When we dealers buy something for a client, provenance is key. You want to know who has shown it, owned it and what label is on the back,” says Van de Weghe. The auction houses agree. “We will do due diligence ourselves—like we do for 99.9% of the artists we handle,” says Barker.
Warhol, however, is not just any other artist. He was unbelievably prolific, and the range of his output (and subsequent variety of prices) allows for different types of buying from the high-profile pieces bought by major collectors to newer buyers starting with prints. Warhol is associated with American post-war optimism at its peak, and his iconic subjects and saturated colour schemes have an instant appeal. His name carries a brand power that extends beyond the inner coterie of the market and a strong level of institutional support underpins his reputation, cementing his place in art history.
Meanwhile, the deep private market includes powerful backers such as the Mugrabi family, which owns more than 800 works of art by the artist, and is prepared to invest in the long-term health of the Warhol market: during the 2008-09 downturn, the Mugrabis bought or underbid, on average, on 31% of the total auction value of Warhol paintings, and spent $36.8m on Warhol works at auction in 2010, according to ArtTactic. Jose Mugrabi declined to comment.
There are more than 100,000 works by Warhol (across all media), according to Wachs, who says that only around 6,600 of them have gone through the authentication process. “People put too much emphasis on it—around 95% of Andy’s work is still out there. The market will have to take care of itself.” Perhaps the sheer size of the Warhol market means that, like the banks, it will simply be too big to fail.
Controversial decisions
The board has spent huge sums on legal fees defending some of its decisions. Last year it forked out $7m defending an antitrust lawsuit brought by US collector Joe Simon-Whelan. He accused the board of “engaging in a conspiracy to restrain and monopolise trade in the market for Warhol works” and alleged that the board had denied the authenticity of a 1964 Warhol portrait he owned (left) that had been widely accepted by other experts as a genuine work. Simon-Whelan dropped the case in October, saying that he could not afford to continue litigation. “We have fought every suit that has been brought because we felt strongly about not setting that precedent,” said Joel Wachs, the president of the Warhol foundation.
The board rejected another work from the same series. The signed and dated self-portrait had been owned by Warhol’s former gallerist, Anthony d’Offay, included with the artist’s knowledge in Rainer Crone’s 1970 catalogue raisonné. The work was meant to be included in the Artist Rooms collection of more than 700 works, which d’Offay gave to the Tate and National Galleries of Scotland in a part gift, part purchase deal in 2008. However, the self portrait was ultimately not included after discussions with the museums. The Tate told The Art Newspaper at the time that: “We agreed with Anthony that it would be better not to include any work, the provenance of which might in any way be questioned. However, we ourselves have no reason to doubt the authenticity of this painting.”
皖公网安备 34010402700602号