Recent Blog Posts
-
The $4.5 Billion Dollar Bank Run
Nov 07 201111:20 am EDT -
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:26 am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:45 am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:00 am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:36 am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:37 pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:41 am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:32 am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:29 pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:09 pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Art Market Datapoint of the Day
There aren't many minimalist artworks with their own Wikipedia page, but Carl Andre's Equivalent VIII is one of them, thanks to the uproar it caused in the UK press in the 1976. To this day, a huge proportion of the UK population would know exactly what you were talking about if you referred to "the bricks".
Equivalent VIII is one of eight works comprising 120 fire bricks: they're all two bricks high, and this one is six brick headers wide by ten brick stretchers long. Much of Britain was outraged when the Tate spent £7,000 on the work in the 1970s.
One of the other works, Equivalent V (12 brick headers wide by six stretchers wide), recently came up for auction at Sotheby's, and was bought for $1 million by MoMA, in an act of bargain-hunting: MoMA was the only bidder, and got it for significantly less than its $1.2 million to $1.6 million estimate.
I'm not surprised that there's no controversy at all about MoMA buying a pile of bricks for $1 million, while there are to this day Brits who think that the £7,000 spent by the Tate was a waste of money. But it's interesting that interest in the work fell away substantially the minute that the market started falling, leaving the window open for MoMA to snap the work up on the "cheap". In a recession, people want paintings to hang on walls, not icons of minimalism.
I am glad though that the Tate's bricks will have a sibling at MoMA. They can be a bit like Cleopatra's Needles -- one on the Thames, the other in midtown Manhattan. Make sure you see them both!
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.




