Digitisation and art-рынок. What can we expect in the future
ARTinvestment.RU   24 апреля 2019

From the former projected IT-прорывов, surprisingly, not much came true. Maybe for the best. It is believed that instead of helping the world Internet-гиганты lead us into a trap. And only a small part of the richest population quickly realized what was happening

Eyes opened to all the press. In late March, The New York Times published an article by its IT-обозревателя Nellie Bowles (Nellie Bowles) called Human Contact Is Now a Luxury Good — "Chat with a live person has become a luxury." the Author proposed an unexpected look at the consequences of digitalization. Bowles drew attention to the fact that if before laptops and iPhones to the latest model were the attributes of the elite, now high status men, by contrast, emphasizes the ability to do without smartphones and other gadgets. They say the rich don't need to call — if it-то need, then they will gain. And this is not the snobbish idea of the article. Another idea Nellie Bowles was the fact that today electronic services become a means of enslavement, and in fact a sign of poverty. Therefore it is not necessary to enjoy the accessibility of all electronic and distance, whether it's online-обучение or telemedicine. About you don't care. You simply save. The rich, on the contrary, do not buy the webinar and the service good tutor or a personal consultation. But when you are surrounded by digital comfort, give like free email and ensure the wide availability of smartphones, you should know that you turn to food for corporations. To pay for free digital services the foolish the poor and the middle class will have "nature": the attention, information about their tastes, habits, vices, illnesses — innermost to more sophisticated was to sell goods, services, loans, mortgages. In other words, through the massive achievements of "digitalization" corporations first, people climb into the pants, then the pockets. In particular, the voluntary use of free services with forced ad the author compares with harmful habits such as Smoking and unhealthy diet. Rich, she draws our attention to the "smoke" is much less. That is, unlike the poor and middle class the rich have long understood and your attention do not sell.

His cruel hypothesis, the author confirms the concrete manifestations and consequences of the coming of digitalization. In particular, cites the story of American old men who the rest of his days carried out not with real cats, and with tablets, equipped with a program-кошкой from Care.Coach. It would seem that bad? But the author believes that this is not the result of the triumph of humanism and progress, but primarily a way to save. Instead of expensive American social worker for the poor elderly through the tablet's camera looks cheap, costing the operator sitting where-то in the Philippines or in Latin America. And the most heartbreaking example — is when a terminal diagnosis to low-income patients reports not the doctor personally, and "telemedicine robot", which drives him to the house. And it is a reality and not a fantastic Hollywood dystopia.

the Emotional message of the article to this point comes to a climax: chat with real professionals (including medicine and education) will soon finally will be the prerogative of the rich. And all the restCorporation "digitized", will create online-сервисы, write them scripts and will release the tools of enslavement (gadgets) that these boobies themselves are willing to buy (and gifted even take a loan).

Overseas publication about digital animal grin of capitalism were unprecedented outcry in our country. I do not remember. In the morning the essence of Human Contact Is Now a Luxury Good told a Russian Telegram-каналы. And in a few hours about her arguing in offices and kitchens.

Hooked. Insulted. And opened the eyes of them. And they knew that they were naked.

of Course, the discussion began. Some said: it is the author's right. Under the guise of eliminating the "digital divide" we have converted to a dairy herd for companies working with big data. And we do allow and condone this, exchanging human communication to a digital one. Others objected to them: big deal — human contact! The rich and had "French-гувернеров", assistants and other helpers. With live assistants the. But they themselves, like a lamb, use smartphones. Just happens that they're-то this smartphone is.

Generally speaking, in the rest of the article idea is not a revelation. Who's going to argue that intelligent tutor more effective than independent reading of the textbook. Or that any competent instructor will teach faster and better than tutorials on YouTube. So. But it is not necessary to dramatize. People use "inhuman" technology not from poverty. Often they are driven by pragmatism and reasonable laziness. People choose convenience, save energy and nerves, improving their performance. Victory "digitization" is inevitable. It is possible to resist, to shut out, to solve everything through the living. In extreme snobbery to walk up to the horse-drawn stagecoaches and carrier pigeons. But the messengers still win due to speed and reliability.

this Dispute is hard to finish. Therefore, I propose that we leave aside the story about the new class markers, and to speculate about what concerns us. Namely the challenges faced by the dilapidated Bastion of art-рынка under pressure nagleyuschih digital future.

firstly, let's consider digital technologies and formats, which already did not justify the associated expectations. Not that they were a dead end, the capture rate of the world has been greatly exaggerated. Plus the ideas behind them, as it turned out, not so strong.

so that's what I feel, do not shoot within the next 5-10 years:

1. The online fair. The virtual venues of meetings of galleries with buyers predicted the future "killers" of traditional expensive salons. It's one thing to pay for ruinous logistics (send a truck from Europe to the salon in Russia costs about EUR 25 000), and quite another — to rent a "booth" on the Internet. This idea of trying to make fair VIP in 2011-2012. I thought it was such a good idea: a consortium of influential investors, support from the most famous galleries type Zwirner (even more important). In the end, two actions took place — and all, the theme of blown away. In 2013, , VIP Art Fair have been purchased still alive by the Artspace platform. And after the case VIP format online-ярмарки pure noticeable success never had. Human contact in this area is the winner.

2. Art-биржи, mutualfunds art, release art-акций and other derivatives related to art. Remember, it was all terribly fashionable years theme 7-8 ago. To divide a masterpiece of Kandinsky into shares, and to release them under the securities and continue to earn on growth of the asset price. Isn't that sweet? Not coincidentally, this idea in various forms for-прежнему dominates the minds of "startups". And most of all she inspired those who had never seen real art buyers or art-дилеров, does not know the psychology of these people, the degree of individualism and how everything on your mind. The evidence of the weakness of the idea of fractional ownership masterpieces lies in the empirical sphere. Still no public success stories in this field. 7-8 years ago was exchange SplitArt and Art Exchange. Was art-фонды , and , . In short, attempts were failures, was suspicious of the story, smacks of fraud. And successful practices why-то not remember.

3. Blockchain. Talked a lot about this the last two-три years, published a compelling white paper who-то even tried to capitalize on ICO. But the things are there. For the art-рынка no method of practical application of the blockchain was not useful. No subject took off. Yet. No the"pipeline" auctions, a fully managed digital algorithms. There are no long-promised global monitoring system of digital rights, had to create the market of digital art. Nothing. Turned out to be too much determined by human factor , the blockchain will not soon take hold in the art market.

Well, enough about sad. Back to the predictions. What will happen to art-рынком with high probability in the near future? I think so:

1. Remote auction trade will press strongly, and sometimes completely replace the classic scheme of "the auctioneer with a hammer in the hall." Only it is not necessary to convince that the rich will still require a live auctioneer. View broadcast from the most prestigious trades in the world. Many you see in the hall sheiks, Japanese billionaires, catching sight quick professional-ведущего? Here is the answer. Brokers, dealers, agents, "phones" — that all human contact in the hall. And this is the main auction houses in the world. What can we say about the thousands of smaller auction firms. For example, in Moscow of empty chairs during the auction every year is increasing. And those that are busy, mostly busy with the spectators, not buyers. the index of consumer activity ARTIMXbа is growing significantly. Why? It is clear that buyers are trading from home. No, I don't think that auction rooms will disappear completely. Like not disappeared the theatre with the advent of television. But it is obvious that the number of full-time trading will dramatically decrease in the future.

2. The new situation formed around exhibitions and exhibition spaces. People will rarely go to exhibitions. At least feet. Sounds crazy? So far, Yes. On the background of the Museum boom after the phenomenon of "queue Serov" this thesis is difficult to substantiate and confirm convincing examples. However, art lovers and professionals are rapidly learning to look exhibition on the Internet. And many this is enough. If I'm right, then in a few years the audience will split arbitrarily into "cinema" (those who spend time and money onHiking in the Museum room) and your "streaming" (those who watch the exhibition in the photo on the Network). "Streaming" will grow faster. I see it as two almost disjoint over the world. Blockbusters in the major museums don't have to complain about the lack of visitors. But the exhibition projects in private galleries will become increasingly difficult to win the attention. They will quickly-то to invent and to improve the presentation of their projects for grown-up of Millennials.

3. Audience of art lovers all more will be split into "progressives" and "archaists". The art-рынке will become harder to stand apart separate circles, worlds of the audience on the criteria of their relationship to art on the Internet. The Foundation of this division we see now. In particular, it is recognized that there is a parallel universe where rich people buy art on the basis of only information obtained from communication with real people — dealers, friends, all those whom they trust. A vivid example of the reliance on human contact — case collection Rybolovlev collected through human contact with Bouvier. In a world overflowing with information, there are people who don't check prices, attend auctions (and online even more so), that is, all the actions seemed to mock theory of rational consumer behavior. According to one of its postulates, one seeks to maximize the benefit. But in the art world it doesn't work very often. Experienced in business, people often ignore information from the Internet and other public sources. This is not good and not bad — have the right to do as they like. I'm just saying that the "digitalization" of art-рынка a significant portion of affluent buyers, most likely, will not notice. But everyone else will like it.

To this list we can add the rapidly changing methods of communication art-бизнесов with external audiences and presentation of information about their artists. This conversation is not so much about fashion as about the real convenience and efficiency. For example, recently a private website for art-бизнеса ceased to be a tool of a highest priority. Much more effective were the social network and a common platform with ready-made traffic. But more on that next time.

the Enumeration of emerging technology trends suggests, unfortunately, there's a happy thought. Pervasive digitalization — is a challenge for more Western art-рынка. Russia again your way. And, I would say that his name — hypocrisy plus archaism. Until the TV goes out of his way, promoting the importance of the transition to digital technology, the reality is exactly the opposite. Digital dissociative disorder — as well as on-другому called? First claim the program "Digital economy", and then chasing the "keys to the Telegram", trample down your own Internet, impose pre-trial blocking, transplanted Russian VPN and spend untold resources on clumsy "sovereign Internet". First talking about the improving business climate and enhancing transparency, and then introduce quasianalog and the humiliating conditions of work for the art-рынке, forcing legitimate sellers art underground. It remains a sin of greed and stupidity, or to reassure themselves that the strikes on the Internet and online-бизнесу we justadvance transferred to fashionable human contact.

Vladimir Bogdanov, AI

Source: nytimes.com