It was also revealed yesterday that the illustrations are owned not by a foreign private collector as originally thought, but by an investment fund.
"When you split these things up it is an affront to everyone who loves Blake," said Tim Heath, the chairman of the Blake Society, which studies the visionary artist who died in 1827.
"It is such a pity because so much of Blake's work has been divided up and lost for commercial reasons. The value is so much greater if they are sold individually."
for the curious, Blake's actualgrave posted by matteo at 10:28 AM on March 17, 2006
Annie: "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom" - William Blake Crash: William Blake? Annie: William Blake! Crash: What do you mean, William Blake? Annie: I mean William Blake! Crash: You know, talking to you is like a Martian having a conversation with a fungo. posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:39 AM on March 17, 2006
"When you split these things up it is an affront to everyone who loves Blake"
So the value of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. I buy this.
"It is such a pity because so much of Blake's work has been divided up and lost for commercial reasons. The value is so much greater if they are sold individually."
But then he seems to contradict himself by saying that the sum of the parts is greater than the value of the whole.
Can the value of works of art such as these to an investor really be that much different than the perceived of the work to the art community as a whole? I mean it's all perceived value, innit? posted by three blind mice at 11:04 AM on March 17, 2006
I think he means that in auction, it's probably likely that a greater total amount can be raised by auctioning each piece separately. However the worth of the portfolio as a whole is immeasurably greater than bits and pieces - the series is a single work, after all.
The cost is greater. The value is diminished. People like that probably don't get the distinction.
I'm sorry I missed it on display at Sotheby's. That's what I get for not paying attention. The last time I was at Tate Britain, they weren't doing the Blake collection proud, exactly, but this would be a terrible loss. I can't exactly explain why I find it so offensive - I realise that it's probably just sentimentality. Don't mind me. posted by Grangousier at 11:12 AM on March 17, 2006
But then he seems to contradict himself
no he doesn't. "The Grave" as a whole has a higher artistic, historical, etc value.
if you split it and sell the pieces, it's more financially valuable, uie you can sell it at a higher price.
see, it's like this: you're probably more financially valuable, if one cuts you open, puts your organs on ice, and then sells them to be transplanted.
but I'm sure your family and loved ones consider you more valuable alive and in one piece, for sentimental reasons, even if they could probably make more money off of your organs posted by matteo at 11:23 AM on March 17, 2006
People like that probably don't get the distinction.
C'mon Grangousier. Stop looking down your nose. I'm thinking that investors have to give propers to the opinions of the arts community and that the difference between what you call "cost" and "value" cannot be so immense. What do investors base their valuations on if not at least, in part, the opinion of the arts community? posted by three blind mice at 11:27 AM on March 17, 2006
no, it's the difference between selling 19 Blakes and selling 1, however bigger and more complex and more historically valuable, Blake
the watercolors tell a story. by splitting them up, they don't anymore. posted by matteo at 11:30 AM on March 17, 2006
but I'm sure your family and loved ones consider you more valuable alive and in one piece, for sentimental reasons, even if they could probably make more money off of your organs
If my family and loved ones were able to bid then they would set the price. And if some art collector considers the Blake collection more valuable as a whole, than in parts, then they will set the price. posted by three blind mice at 11:31 AM on March 17, 2006
the watercolors tell a story. by splitting them up, they don't anymore.
I'm totally down with that matteo. What is harder for me to accept is that people who invest with their euros have less appreciation for the value of art than a person who is willing to offer nothing more than his or her opinion. posted by three blind mice at 11:34 AM on March 17, 2006
There's also the question of cost... maybe your family and loved ones would't be able to afford your truw, intact worth? Maybe 19 separate rich folk could afford half a million each, but it's a lot more difficult to find a single person who can afford 10 million all on her lonesome.
If some high resolution scans were to find their way online before the breakup, I wouldn't mind a diaspora. I don't need a physical presence to touch the man.
Damien Hirst? posted by bardic at 1:02 PM on March 17, 2006
Turner's not bad, but given a choice between him and the best Continental artists, I'm not sure he'd stand much of a chance. As for Hirst, I think Jones was referring to historical art figures, not contemporary art, but time will tell, I suppose ... posted by bcveen at 1:16 PM on March 17, 2006
I was joking. Maybe. posted by bardic at 1:19 PM on March 17, 2006
this lot was found in 2001 in Caledonia Books, a small Glasgow bookshop on the Great Western Road. It goes down as one of the greatest bookshop finds ever and precipitated a legal battle between the owner and the buyers. In the end a split of the profits was agreed. The first link has more info. posted by johnny novak at 12:00 AM on March 18, 2006
I've heard that the Huntington does not have much in the way of a cash endowment--ol' Henry didn't anticipate the costs of keeping his home/museum running into the next century. Few institutions could afford the asking price for the full suite, unfortunately. But maybe if the Friends of the Library had a really special cactus and muffin sale...? posted by Scram at 1:34 AM on March 19, 2006
« Older Upset that the NYC Department of Health has ordere... | Spider-Man in Arabic.... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
