Garbage Collection

Andrew Leci looks at collectibles in the art world and suggests that talent doesn’t play as big a role as we might have imagined (or hoped). Some art is Grade A rubbish, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth acquiring.

- Andrew Leci

IN 1987, WHEN Vincent van Gogh’s Sunflowers (1888 – painted in the last few months of his life) sold at auction for very nearly US$40 million, the art world stood up and took note. It was triple what anyone (anywhere) had paid for an artwork at auction, and 320,000 times more than the artist himself had tried to sell it for.

Van Gogh committed suicide at the age of 37, tired of being unable to sell his paintings; tired of being unable to hear properly after lopping off most of an ear; tired of life. His brother, Theo – a Dutch art dealer – supported him financially throughout most of his adult life (and provided the tools of his non-trade), and when Vincent discovered a stash of his own paintings at Theo’s house (unsold, obviously) – it was, allegedly, the straw that broke the camel’s back for an artist suffering from mental health issues.

Interestingly, later in 1987, Van Gogh’s Irises sold for US$53.9 million, which means that in the space of eight months, the artist’s work had fetched 47,000 times more than the artist himself earned from art in his entire lifetime.

These days, you can’t buy a Van Gogh for love nor money, and the irony that Vincent managed to genuinely sell only one painting in the course of his career (Red Vineyards at Arles, 1888) can’t be lost on anyone. The questions will always be: why wasn’t his talent appreciated while he was alive and how profitable is it for an artist to die? At least for investors and collectors. For the artist; not so much.