LUCAS CRANACH THE ELDER ST. HELENA AND THE CROSS, oil on canvas, 1525 . Cincinnati Art Museum
|
|
Images: (L) Zurbarán', St. Francis d'Assisi in Meditation (1635-9) The National Gallery, London;; (R)Dali's Crucifixion (Corpus Hypercubus (1954) ;The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Of the two great works shown above, one may reasonably ask: which is Classic and which is Modern? To the left we see Francisco de Zurbarán's astonishing St. Francis d'Assisi in Meditation (1635-9), one of the Spanish master's "most austere and intensely spiritual works", as described by The National Gallery in London, which holds the picture. But the emotional impact of the painting goes beyond such description: never in the history of art until this point has a saint been shown with this manner of expression of ecstasy in his features. There is an intellectual quality to the work, imparted by the angle of the shadow that obscures his face, giving us just a glimpse of his features--it is strikingly abstract and wonderfully modernist. Such form of expression was exceptional for that era--one might say for the entire history of art up until that point. The eyes elude us, making contact neither with the viewer nor an object of veneration such as a Cross and this lack of apparent focus draws in one's focus even more, inspiring the viewer to seek out clues to the rapture of this otherworldly rapture. The slight uptilt of the head suggests a passionate gaze upon God in heaven and this renders his face all the more arresting. Viewing this masterpiece in contrast to the work on the right, Salvador Dali's Crucifixion (Corpus Hypercubus (1954), it is as if their respective epochs are reversed: the abstract quality of the St. Francis is emphasized and the "Old Masters" vibe of the Dali, a work completed in 1954, becomes pronounced. Though supremely modern, Corpus Hypercubus feels as if it could have been painted centuries ago-the tones, the tenebrist shadings, the classical composition of Mary (Dali's wife having posed as the figure) --the folds of her dress, the colors. The two periods of these works, the 17th and 20th centuries, could not be further apart in terms of material, social and political values. Yet in their spiritual harmony 'Time" ceases to exist, there is only time-transcendance of the power of emotion conveyed. A great art collection does not simply 'mix' ancient and contemporary works for the sake of being fashionably eclectic, but seeks the uniformity of the timeless in their relation--thus it making little difference whether the works are almost four hundred or only several decades old.
Of the two great works shown above, one may reasonably ask: which is Classic and which is Modern? To the left we see Francisco de Zurbarán's astonishing St. Francis d'Assisi in Meditation (1635-9), one of the Spanish master's "most austere and intensely spiritual works", as described by The National Gallery in London, which holds the picture. But the emotional impact of the painting goes beyond such description: never in the history of art until this point has a saint been shown with this manner of expression of ecstasy in his features. There is an intellectual quality to the work, imparted by the angle of the shadow that obscures his face, giving us just a glimpse of his features--it is strikingly abstract and wonderfully modernist. Such form of expression was exceptional for that era--one might say for the entire history of art up until that point. The eyes elude us, making contact neither with the viewer nor an object of veneration such as a Cross and this lack of apparent focus draws in one's focus even more, inspiring the viewer to seek out clues to the rapture of this otherworldly rapture. The slight uptilt of the head suggests a passionate gaze upon God in heaven and this renders his face all the more arresting. Viewing this masterpiece in contrast to the work on the right, Salvador Dali's Crucifixion (Corpus Hypercubus (1954), it is as if their respective epochs are reversed: the abstract quality of the St. Francis is emphasized and the "Old Masters" vibe of the Dali, a work completed in 1954, becomes pronounced. Though supremely modern, Corpus Hypercubus feels as if it could have been painted centuries ago-the tones, the tenebrist shadings, the classical composition of Mary (Dali's wife having posed as the figure) --the folds of her dress, the colors. The two periods of these works, the 17th and 20th centuries, could not be further apart in terms of material, social and political values. Yet in their spiritual harmony 'Time" ceases to exist, there is only time-transcendance of the power of emotion conveyed. A great art collection does not simply 'mix' ancient and contemporary works for the sake of being fashionably eclectic, but seeks the uniformity of the timeless in their relation--thus it making little difference whether the works are almost four hundred or only several decades old.
My Work:
This anecdote explains the spirit of my work, which is to advise and curate small, exquisite collections that tap into and fulfill the aesthetic imagination of the client. The emphasis is Old Masters, yet in a way that I refer to as "the New Modern". This consists of: a) the above-type complementarity between 'ancient' and contemporary works; b) or instead, a complete focus upon Old Masters emphasizing the "beautiful violence" of those works for a core collection. By that expression I refer to the timeless allegories of powerful religious and mythological themes that have emotional and psychological--even political--relevance to the world today: c) to seek out the first tier of the lesser-known Old Masters, whose treasures are not only often overlooked but whose value may strongly appreciate (as determined by auction sales of museum exhibition inclusion).
INVESTMENT IN OLD MASTERS
The legendary Old Masters art dealer Richard Feigen observed sometime ago that works of art have become "quasi financial instruments due to changes in the art market which itself has become more of a financial market." Peter Passell, now with the Milken Institute, has also analyzed at length what economists believe is the The most fundamental change in the art market in recent years has been the reconfiguration of art into an asset class as a practical vehicle for investment. The Sotheby's Art Index notes an appreciation of values of over 400% in the last decade. Beyond aesthetic considerations, there is, as William Grampp noted in his book Pricing the Priceless, "a new breed of collector, one essentially interested in the financial return on his investment in art."
There is a difference between art-as-investment and art-as-commodity. The valuation structure of the so-called 'superprices' that began in the late '70s and the '80s ballooned art into a commodity. Many are aware that banks like Citi and Chase have their own art investment branches and a while back Sotheby's founded, in effect, its own investment bank for investors looking for high-end art purchases as a transfer-of-assets within their portfolios. As Dallas-based collector Raymond Nasher commented "Quality art is as good an investment as anyone can have."
This anecdote explains the spirit of my work, which is to advise and curate small, exquisite collections that tap into and fulfill the aesthetic imagination of the client. The emphasis is Old Masters, yet in a way that I refer to as "the New Modern". This consists of: a) the above-type complementarity between 'ancient' and contemporary works; b) or instead, a complete focus upon Old Masters emphasizing the "beautiful violence" of those works for a core collection. By that expression I refer to the timeless allegories of powerful religious and mythological themes that have emotional and psychological--even political--relevance to the world today: c) to seek out the first tier of the lesser-known Old Masters, whose treasures are not only often overlooked but whose value may strongly appreciate (as determined by auction sales of museum exhibition inclusion).
INVESTMENT IN OLD MASTERS
The legendary Old Masters art dealer Richard Feigen observed sometime ago that works of art have become "quasi financial instruments due to changes in the art market which itself has become more of a financial market." Peter Passell, now with the Milken Institute, has also analyzed at length what economists believe is the The most fundamental change in the art market in recent years has been the reconfiguration of art into an asset class as a practical vehicle for investment. The Sotheby's Art Index notes an appreciation of values of over 400% in the last decade. Beyond aesthetic considerations, there is, as William Grampp noted in his book Pricing the Priceless, "a new breed of collector, one essentially interested in the financial return on his investment in art."
There is a difference between art-as-investment and art-as-commodity. The valuation structure of the so-called 'superprices' that began in the late '70s and the '80s ballooned art into a commodity. Many are aware that banks like Citi and Chase have their own art investment branches and a while back Sotheby's founded, in effect, its own investment bank for investors looking for high-end art purchases as a transfer-of-assets within their portfolios. As Dallas-based collector Raymond Nasher commented "Quality art is as good an investment as anyone can have."