The recent proliferation of data about art prices has been interpreted as the
democratization of a formerly secretive economic sphere. Contesting this
idea, I argue that such data is collected, controlled, and disseminated by
international art dealers and auction houses for the purpose of reinforcing
the myth of a single, integrated market for art. Through the analysis of
presentation strategies in Gagosian Gallery’s online viewing rooms and
Sotheby’s Mei Moses Index, I argue that dominant art world institutions use
art history and price data to support the speculative value of artworks and to
perpetuate knowledge asymmetries that reinforce their own epistemic
authority. I debate whether Friedrich Hayek’s conception of price as an
unbiased aggregator of dispersed information is a useful way of
conceptualizing speculative value in the art world. I conclude that, in contrast
to Hayek’s ideas, contemporary art market data is given the illusion of
democratic dispersal while remaining within the purview of dominant
institutions. The curation of knowledge involved in this process exacerbates
art world inequality and risks sidelining the heterogeneous creative practices
that populate a broad range of creative spheres.
This is an Open Access Article. It is published by Taylor & Francis under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence (CC BY-NC-ND). Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/