Where Art Thou

Freeports and the cost of artwork

In a modern art world that is explicitly dominated by capital, through galleries, auctions, collectors, and tax loopholes, one of the most common questions about exhibitions, galleries, museums, and auctions is one that is never explained by the facilities themselves: how does art move around? Where does it come from? And where do million-dollar pieces go after they are bought from auctions? The truth is, all of the pieces that move around museums and auction houses often begin with collectors, or those who have acquired art for investment purposes. However, art can and does reside inside a private collection or a freeport for years, appreciating in both monetary and historical value as it sits in the privacy of a locked-down facility (Bromovsky, 2024). This is an important aspect of our modern societal art structure to examine, not to over-inform artists or the working class about an over-generalized take on how capital owners have defined culture, specifically in the United States, rather, by setting up the proper tools to better understand how systems of culture flow and work in a system that is intrinsically built on money and influence.

The inherent meaning of these art objects, as they are sold in auction or bought by museums, one could argue, is essentially that of what the market (the ultra wealthy) determines it to be, post-death of the artist. Therefore, these pieces that are being sold for millions, even hundreds of millions of dollars, are not deemed to be worth it because of the artist themselves and what the piece meant to them when they created it, but instead the interpretation and scrutiny that was left behind and picked up and determined by the wealthy collectors and institutions that inherited the piece. The art, with nobody alive to speak for it, is then left to be shaped by the rich and “stamped with their worldview” (Machett, 2023).

Museums and aquisitions

A museum is a public institution in the service of society and culture that researches, collects, conserves, interprets and exhibits pieces gathered over time to display a perspective of culture, all around the world. As a public entity, artwork donated to museums is done so as an act of philanthropy and therefore displays the piece as a public entity for the public to witness, which is incredibly necessary so that interpretations of culture and therefore, art, can be done by the public perception, rather than withheld in a private freeport or collection.

The artwork featured in museums is often by the hands of donations, and bequests. These two features of the public domain of curation of collections have led to some of the most significant and exciting acquisitions that could therefore be perceived by the public eye. Some collectors choose to donate artworks during their lifetimes, others bequeath their collections within their will, or establish foundations to manage their collections posthumously (Souza, 2024). The acquisition process is handled by museum curators and an acquisition committee. The specialists decide which artworks to acquire for the institutions, guided by the museum’s current exhibition, cultural relevance, or budget considerations (Souza, 2024).

A prime example of artwork displayed in museums through donations is Artist Jacques-Louis David’s “La Mort de Marat”, painted in 1793. Famous for being memorialized as a highly important historical piece and an icon of the French Revolution. There are three versions of this piece that sit in three different museums, through three different directions for acquisition. Two copies, known to be painted by David’s assistants, one of which, located in Versailles, is on loan at the musée Carnavalet for the “1793” exhibition. The other is located at the Louve, where it is currently on display. The original, however, is located in the Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Belgium, donated by the descendants of Jacques-Louis David after he chose to live in Belgium after exile from France.

A fascinating example of a Belgian museum acquiring a painting by a French painter, simply because of decisions made by the family.

Another great example of donations to a museum by a family, is the iconic Walter and Lenore Annenberg collection, valued at $1billion in 1991, where numerous Impressionist and Post-Impressionist masterpieces, including works by Monet, Renoir, and Seurat, were donated to the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Souza, 2024).

Even with various donations and public funding, museums often compete in the secondary art market because of the steep pricing. Painted in 1776, Joshua Reynolds’ “Portrait of Mai” is a recent and famous case of museums acquiring a portrait through the secondary market. Seller John Magnier previously acquired the painting from Sotheby’s in 2001 for £10.3 million. Years later, he decided to sell to pay for his divorce (remember Sotheby’s “The Three D’s?). The painting which is said to be one of the most important and influential portraits in British art history. It was bought in a last-ditch effort to keep it out of private hands by a partnership between the Getty in Los Angeles and the National Portrait Gallery. International joint acquisitions such as this one are extremely rare. Never before has a UK museum linked up with a US institution and split the cost of $61 million to obtain a work of such cultural value and rarity.

This action was done to keep the incredibly important painting out of private freeports and collections, and into the public eye once more. But that begs the question, when art is bought at auction-

Where does art go after it is acquired by collectors, and why does it so rarely re-enter public view?