The Groove 224 - Why Artists Hate the Market, But Still Need It
Welcome to the 224th issue of The Groove.
I am Maria Brito, an art advisor, curator, and author based in New York City.
If you haven’t done so, please subscribe here, to get The Groove in your inbox for free every Tuesday.
WHY ARTISTS HATE THE ART MARKET, BUT STILL NEED IT
Every artist dreams of making a living from their work. But the moment money enters the picture, things get complicated. The art market, consisting of galleries, auction houses, collectors, dealers, advisors, and fairs, is both a lifeline and a battlefield. It funds careers but it also dictates trends. It elevates some artists to superstardom while leaving others behind. It turns creativity into a commodity, and let’s be honest, most artists have conflicting feelings about that.
They hate it. They resent it. They question its power.
But they also need it.
Because as much as art is about expression, someone has to buy it for an artist to keep making more. That tension has fueled some of the biggest debates in art history, from the Renaissance to right now. So why is the relationship between artists and the market so fraught?
“Art Should Be Pure!” (But Also Pay My Rent)
The elusive Agnes Martin in New Mexico in 1974.
Most artists aren’t in it for the money. The majority of the many hundreds of artists I’ve met create because they have to, because the act of making is as essential as breathing. That’s the romantic ideal, at least. But at some point, reality kicks in: studio rent isn’t free, student loans must be paid, materials cost money, and no one likes the feeling of being “exposure-paid” for their work.
Even artists who reject the market entirely have to find a way to survive. Agnes Martin fled New York to live in near-isolation in New Mexico, but she still had representation from the Robert Elkon Gallery, and Pace, which ensured that her paintings were still bought and sold for increasing amounts, despite her attempts to detach from commercialism.
Donald Judd, the ultimate minimalist purist, set up shop in Marfa, Texas, but he still needed collectors to buy his pieces so he could fund his vision. He was represented by Leo Castelli, one of the most influential New York galleries during the 70s and 80s.
Art needs an audience, and if that audience includes people willing to spend six or seven figures, is that really such a bad thing?
The Market Picks Favorites (And It’s Not Always Fair)
Noah Davis, Single Mother with Father Out of the Picture, 2007, oil, acrylic, and graphite on canvas.
Here’s where the resentment creeps in: the art market is not a meritocracy. It never has been.
Look at Noah Davis. He was immensely talented and created haunting, deeply personal paintings, but he was overlooked during his lifetime and then died of cancer in 2015 at age 32. While Davis was undoubtedly ambitious and sought recognition for his work, he faced frustrations in gaining widespread commercial success during his lifetime. In 2008, he was included in the influential “30 Americans” exhibition by the Rubell family, yet his career did not gain the momentum he had hoped for.
Now, many years after his death, his estate is represented by David Zwirner and some of his paintings have been sold at auction for seven figures.
Meanwhile, artists who aren’t nearly as good have strategically played the market: aligning themselves with the right galleries, collectors, and “collector whisperers” who can see their careers skyrocket. Not always because their work is groundbreaking, but because the right people say it is. That’s why some artists feel like their success is based less on talent and more on politics, branding, and networking.
It’s enough to make anyone cynical.
The Market Boom That Created (and Destroyed) Careers
From 2018 to 2023, when the world was flush with money, some artists saw a meteoric rise in their markets that surpassed all expectations. Ultra-wealthy collectors were spending aggressively, galleries were racing to secure fresh talent, and auction houses were happy to stoke the frenzy. Young artists, sometimes with only a handful of solo shows under their belts, saw their work sell for five, ten, or even twenty times their estimates.
But markets built on hype are fragile. Now that the global economy has cooled, many of those artists’ markets have collapsed, exposing the speculative nature of their success. Prices have plummeted, and some of the collectors who bought into the hype are quietly offloading works at steep losses. The hardest-hit artists are often those who had little control over their market in the first place; artists whose work was suddenly flipped at auction before they could establish long-term collectors or institutional support.
The same market that made them overnight stars is now moving on to the next big thing.
Selling Out vs. Selling Smart
Simone Leigh’s show at Matthew Marks in Chelsea, New York. December 2024 (c) Maria Brito.
Artists are often taught that real art comes from struggle and that financial success somehow taints creativity. I am personally against the “starving artist” myth because it really isn’t true: every major artist we celebrate today worked the system in some way.
For example, someone like Simone Leigh. She’s a powerhouse now who won the Venice Biennale’s Golden Lion in 2022. But for years, the commercial side of the art world didn’t quite know what to do with her. Leigh’s sculptures of Black women didn’t fit into an easy marketable category. Until suddenly they did. Now, demand far outweighs supply.
I was actually at the Hugo Boss ceremony and gala in New York at the Guggenheim Museum when she won the now-defunct prize in October 2018. Truth be told, not very many people in the room had heard of her, even though she had previous recognition for receiving grants and awards and being included in important institutional exhibitions. However, she wasn’t a major commercial success at that point.
But winning the Hugo Boss prize came with getting a solo show at the Guggenheim. After that, demand for her work increased dramatically and prices skyrocketed. She had four different galleries in the span of six years: first she was with Luhring Augustine from 2016 until after she won the Hugo Boss prize, then she left them and went to David Kordansky in 2019, followed by Hauser & Wirth in 2020 until 2022 when she signed a representation contract with Matthew Marks who still works with her. Amidst all these moves and triumphs, in October 2020 it was announced that she would represent the United States at the Venice Biennale.
The line between “selling out” and “selling smart” is razor-thin. The difference is control. If an artist is making work they believe in while also navigating the market on their terms, that’s not selling out. That’s strategy.
The real trap is when an artist starts making work just because it’s what the market wants. That’s when the balance tips, and when resentment sets in.
The Market Is a Game. The Best Artists Play It Without Losing Themselves.
So where does that leave artists today? In the same paradox they’ve always been in: dependent on a system they don’t entirely trust.
Some try to opt out. They build relationships with collectors, selling their work directly from the studio or doing one-off projects with different galleries from time to time. Needless to say, only artists of a certain level and with many years of career under their belts can do that successfully instead of relying on gallery representation.
Others embrace the market fully, understanding that it’s a tool, not an enemy. And the smartest ones make the system work for them without letting it define them.
Because here’s the truth: every single market, from stocks to real estate, will always be flawed, biased, and frustrating.
The art market has a particularity that others don’t, though: people love art enough to pay for it even if the prices are completely arbitrary. Throughout my life, I’ve known plenty of people who “invest” in art, but the number of passionate collectors who get off on these objects far outweigh those who are in it just to make money.
And if that means more artists get to keep making work, then maybe the market is a necessary evil worth embracing.