The Unforeseen Shift at Frieze New York 2017: A Modernist Takeover?

Frieze New York 2017 presented an unexpected face to its eager attendees. Traditionally celebrated as a vibrant crucible for contemporary art, showcasing the cutting edge and the fresh from the studio, this particular edition felt remarkably different. The prevailing sentiment among many was encapsulated in a single, questioning phrase: “a modernist Frieze?” It was a fair that seemed to deviate sharply from its established identity, sparking conversations and concerns about the direction of one of the art world’s most influential platforms.

Frieze’s Enduring Identity: A Beacon for the Contemporary Avant-Garde

For years, Frieze has cultivated a distinct reputation as a global leader in contemporary art. Its fairs in London and New York have become synonymous with discovery, presenting the latest works from emerging talents and established figures alike. Visitors typically flock to Frieze anticipating an immersive experience of innovation: art coming straight from artists’ studios, brimming with fresh ideas, experimental techniques, and energetic dialogues about the present and future of art. This commitment to the immediate and the new is what has historically set Frieze apart, fostering an environment where challenging concepts and groundbreaking aesthetics thrive.

The Modernist Influx: A Significant Departure from Expectation

The observation at Frieze New York 2017 was striking. Instead of the anticipated torrent of brand-new, studio-fresh creations, the fair appeared to be “filled with modernist works.” This wasn’t merely a sprinkling of historical pieces for context, but a noticeable prevalence that shifted the entire tenor of the event. The vibrant pulse of immediacy, the thrill of encountering something truly unprecedented, felt diminished. The exhibition halls, often buzzing with the energy of artistic frontiers, seemed to exude a different, more subdued aura. The prevailing sentiment was that the offerings were “not fresh and energetic at all,” leading to a distinct sense of disillusionment among those who sought the characteristic Frieze spark.

Distinguishing Modernism from Contemporary Art at Frieze

To fully grasp the significance of this shift, it’s crucial to understand the distinction. Modernism, broadly spanning from the late 19th century to the mid-20th century, encompasses iconic movements like Cubism, Surrealism, Abstract Expressionism, and Pop Art. Contemporary art, on the other hand, refers to art created from roughly the 1960s or 70s to the present day. While both are vital chapters in art history, Frieze built its reputation on championing the latter – the art that directly reflects our current moment, often challenging norms and pushing boundaries in ways that modernist works, by their very historical nature, cannot.

Why the Shift? Unpacking the Market Dynamics of 2017

The presence of a greater number of modernist works at Frieze 2017 was not merely an aesthetic choice; it hinted at deeper market forces at play. Several factors might have contributed to this strategic pivot by galleries:

• Market Stability and Proven Value: In uncertain economic climates, collectors often gravitate towards art with established provenance and a track record of appreciating value. Modernist works, having withstood the test of time, offer a perceived stability that contemporary art, with its inherent risk and speculative nature, sometimes lacks.
• Broadening Collector Appeal: While Frieze traditionally caters to contemporary collectors, incorporating modernist pieces can attract a wider demographic, including seasoned collectors whose portfolios span multiple periods. This could be a tactical move to expand the buyer base.
• Secondary Market Opportunities: Galleries might have been capitalising on the secondary market, showcasing significant modernist works acquired from private collections or estates, rather than solely focusing on their primary market artists (those they represent directly from the studio).
• Commercial Pragmatism: Art fairs are, at their core, commercial ventures for galleries. The decision to bring more commercially viable, historically validated works could have been a pragmatic response to the competitive landscape and the pressure to generate sales.

The Erosion of “Original Identity” and the Visitor Experience

The influx of modernist works at Frieze New York 2017 raised fundamental questions about the fair’s “original identity.” If Frieze, renowned for its contemporary focus, begins to resemble other major fairs that mix periods, what distinguishes it? The unique selling proposition – the promise of discovering the next big thing, the thrill of confronting truly fresh artistic expressions – risks being diluted.

For the dedicated contemporary art collector, curator, or enthusiast, the lack of “fresh and energetic” works was particularly disappointing. The usual excitement of compiling “my picks” of groundbreaking new works from emerging artists or daring new series from established contemporary figures was notably absent, replaced by a sense of commercial pragmatism that overshadowed artistic adventure. This shift could lead to a less stimulating and inspiring experience for those seeking the very essence of Frieze.

The Collector’s Dilemma and the Blurring Lines

When the lines between a contemporary art fair and a broader historical art fair blur, collectors face a dilemma. Those seeking the bleeding edge might feel underserved, while those looking for blue-chip modernist pieces might find the selection still too narrow compared to dedicated historical fairs. This identity crisis potentially impacts both the fair’s niche audience and its broader appeal.

Beyond 2017: A Broader Trend in Art Fairs?

The Frieze New York 2017 experience could be seen as an isolated incident, or it might hint at a broader evolving trend within the competitive international art fair circuit. As the number of art fairs proliferate globally, each vying for attention from galleries and collectors, the pressure to differentiate while ensuring commercial success is immense. Could this have been an experiment in diversification? Or a signal of galleries adopting more cautious, market-driven strategies across the board, prioritising sales of established works over the riskier, often less immediate, returns of purely experimental contemporary art?

Rekindling the Spark: The Future of Frieze’s Contemporary Ethos

The challenge for Frieze going forward is how to navigate these commercial realities while reaffirming its commitment to its foundational ethos. Its legacy is built on fostering innovation, supporting emerging artists, and providing a platform for critical contemporary discourse. Striking a balance between commercial viability and artistic integrity is paramount. Re-emphasising its focus on “studio-fresh” art, perhaps through curated sections or dedicated initiatives for new talent, could help rekindle the unique energy that attendees have come to expect and cherish.

A Frieze Reimagined, Or Simply Redefined?

Frieze New York 2017 served as a potent moment of reflection for many in the art world. Was the prevalence of modernist works a temporary anomaly, a strategic experiment, or a precursor to a more permanent redefinition of Frieze’s identity? The question — “a modernist Frieze?” — lingers as a reminder that even the most established institutions must continuously evolve, yet also safeguard the unique spirit that made them indispensable in the first place. The art world watches intently to see how Frieze continues to shape, and perhaps redefine, its vision for the future of contemporary art exhibition.