‘Female art was a bargain — I created a gallery for the price of one male artist’

[OvaHere]

I know this is meant to be a celebratory article in one sense but honestly it's a bit depressing.

I would probably like to visit this museum if I was in the area and I'm sure Christian has good intentions for it but the way it's presented in this article feels off somehow. Maybe it's the journalistic slant put on it?

Is it just me? Am I being a bit precious?

When Christian Levett, the British art collector, became interested in the modern and contemporary periods, he rapidly realised that women represented good value for money.
“You could acquire the greatest female artists for a few hundred thousands pounds, whereas the male artists were costing anything between several tens of millions and £200 million,” said the retired hedge-fund manager.
“As I researched it more and more, I thought you could put together a museum-quality collection of female artists for the price of one male artist.”
This month, Levett opened FAMM (Female Artists of Mougins Museum), which is being described as the first museum in continental Europe with its own all-female permanent collection.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/eb569ed6-06e5-4268-b4eb-6916c0600c1c?shareToken=a5429a96127eceee1a6bb098b8b7ad75

The greatest art collectors have always identified areas where they can get 'bargains'. I like how matter of fact the owner is about his financial drive to get more for his money, it makes it so obvious how ridiculous art buying has been historically. I'd go to the museum.

I think it makes a difference that he specifies that the art is museum quality. It's a statement that despite the work being just as good quality as that produced by men, it's undervalued by those who buy artwork. Therefore, the value is placed on the sex of the artist, not the artwork itself

I suppose that's what came across as depressing. However good the art is it's devalued because it was created by a female mind and hand.

I'm guessing most art collectors are men though because a lot more men have millions of disposable income to spend on art.

If he was any kind of feminist he'd have paid the female artists the same as he would've paid the men rather than benefiting from the blatant sexism.

I don't know exactly how art collecting works but in the case of older historical pieces he will have purchased from another art collector/dealer (likely also male) rather than from an artist.

I wonder if someone did choose to pay more than what was thought to be the current market value whether it would permanently raise the value of that art work or not?

Thanks for the share token I noticed this earlier today but didn't have time then to archive and read it. I think he's a business man who knows a bargain when he sees one. I'd love to given the place a look.

What's the betting that tras will on at him to place a work there by a tw.
Assuming there isn't one there already.

I wonder if being showcased in a collection like this will increase the value? I'm presuming that's a big part of what he's trying to do - create the conditions that might influence the market giving him a solid return on his investment.