See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/277249077

The Art of Branding - Lessons from Visual Artists

Article  in  Arts Marketing An International Journal · September 2014

DOI: 10.1108/AM-02-2014-0013

CITATIONS READS

41 8,915

2 authors:

Victoria L. Rodner Finola Kerrigan

Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas University of Birmingham
16 PUBLICATIONS   205 CITATIONS    89 PUBLICATIONS   986 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

reellives View project

BRICS and New Globalization View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Victoria L. Rodner on 26 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

The art of branding – lessons from visual artists.

Introduction – a fresh approach to branding
In the field of marketing, Sheff and Kotler examine the striking differences
between the world of art and the world of business: the arts pride themselves on an
open system that “creates, cajoles, undermines, confronts [and] challenges”, whereas
corporations, by nature have traditionally operated in a closed system, which is
“controlled, systematised [and] resistant to change” (in Butler, 2000: 350). Meyer
and Even, however, affirm that “Fine arts and marketing need not be a contradiction
in itself” (1998: 279) so that allegedly closed systems may in fact learn from the
creativity and audacity of the open systems within the art world. As Schroeder notes,
the fine arts are visual images, and “visual consumption is a key attribute of an
experience economy organized around attention”, where images are “designed to
capture eyeballs and build brand names” (2002: 3). Considering the dynamics of the
visual arts market, this paper examines the essential connections between the world of
art and the spheres of business and marketing, stressing the lessons scholars and
analysts recommend that marketing should learn from the arts and, in particular, from
the successful endeavours of visual artists. In doing so, our paper follows on from the
work of Schroeder (1997, 2002, 2005, 2006), Kerrigan et al. (2011), Fillis (2002,
2004a, 2004b, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011), Thompson (2008), Thornton (2009),
Horowitz (2011), Robertson (2005, 2011), Robertson and Chong (2008), Muñiz et al.
(2014) and others who have acknowledged what business can learn from the arts,
paying particular attention to branding. Specifically, we point to the importance of
understanding branding from the perspective of social, cultural and symbolic capital
(Bourdieu, 1984; Swartz, 1997; Jenkins, 2002; Webb et al., 2012) as well as making
economic assessments within the market. Through an examination of this interplay,
foregrounding and backgrounding of symbolic and economic capital in the art world,
we argue that ‘mainstream’ businesses can learn from the visual arts, about the
increasing importance of foregrounding symbolic capital over the quest for economic
returns in order to appeal to contemporary consumers as well as ensure a sustainable,
credible and branded reputation in the long run.
Here, we explore how artists acknowledge the importance of encouraging
social networks with agents within the art world who have the necessary cultural
capital to shape a market for the artwork and disseminate the artist’s artistic discourse

" 1"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

to wider audiences. Coupled with these forms of social and cultural capital, artists
also reinforce their artistic narrative by accruing symbolic capital (fame and
reputation in the field), which can later be translated by the socially and culturally-
competent art agents into economic gain. In doing so, visual artists aim to establish a
brand identity and incorporate the flexibility required to ensure brand longevity on the
open market. This becomes increasingly important in the age of social media, where
brand control does not lie fully in the hands of the brand owner: today multiple
stakeholders, including ‘paying’ customers as well as admirers of the brand and
detractors, contribute to brand meaning and brand narratives. Gallagher and Sowa
(2014) look at the importance of organisations listening, conversing and measuring
through social media. Looking to the long established practices of the art market and
how value is collectively attributed will provide useful insight for mainstream brands
in the contemporary marketplace. Indeed Preece and Wiggins Johnson (2014) and
Hede (2014) illustrate how arts audiences are developing conversations with arts
organisations via social media and what we can see here, as well as in the wider
marketing field, is a shift towards conversations that audiences/consumers wish to
have rather than ones controlled by the organisation.

Reconceptualising Marketing Practices

Fillis (2009) stresses the need for stale marketing practices to be
reconceptualised in the face of the pressures of increased competition, globalisation
and technological development if they are to escape the shadow of Kotler’s and
Porter’s out-dated marketing models and matrices. Marketing practice traditionally
maintained that producers should gain knowledge of consumers’ needs and then
create products intended to fulfil those needs, whereas today’s marketing experts
acknowledge the need to broaden this original perspective. Therefore, taking a
narrow view, marketing studies often miss out on a wealth of knowledge and differing
perspectives on the same topic. Artists and art professionals, on the other hand,
instinctively foster social and art criticism, taking a multidimensional and
multisensory approach to reality by continually questioning the previous school of
thought or ism. Ind (2006) maintains that branding and marketing should disregard
their traditional universalising and abstracting view of the world and adopt a
multifaceted and more comprehensive Cubist approach which gives many
perspectives of the same thing, so that by breaking away from routine skills of

" 2"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

thinking from single plane to multiplane, artists are able to construct individual views
of the world that permit multiple interpretations (Fillis, 2002; see also Schroeder,
2010; Brown, 2010).
In order to succeed in today’s competitive market, organisations should allow
for this free flow of ideas and healthy criticism of current models of practice. For
Fillis, the modern organisation as an art firm or avant-garde enterprise “allows for the
application of the methods used by artists to create value to be contrasted against
more conventional notions of market making” (2009: 15-16). Italian artist, architect
and biographer, Giorgio Vasari (1511 - 1574), heralded the notion of the artist as a
creator of new entities, affirming that “God was the first artist” (Danto, 1964: 574).
The cultivation of the artist as creative individual and product-led creator accordingly
sets creativity in the arts apart from other industries. Whereas the application of
antiquated business theories has been criticised for stifling creativity and innovation
by insisting on responding to customer demands, Fillis (2009) sees that marketing
must learn from those entrepreneurial visual artists who take a proactive approach and
create a demand for their work. Similarly, and drawing upon Vincent Degot’s
‘Portrait of the Manager as an Artist’ (1987), Atkinson suggests that “aesthetics,
history and criticism are to be seen as valid disciplines for the study of management”
as much as business theories are (2007: 63).
The inward pull of customer-focused marketing means that as much as 90% of
new products are essentially line extensions or improvements, whilst a mere 10% are
truly innovative and actually product-focused (Fillis, 2006: 29; Fillis, 2010; Baxter,
2010). By ignoring the customer’s needs and adopting a product-centred outward
push, managers can truly create innovative commodities. Artists readily apply this
approach in that they shun the notion of following market trends, opting instead to
produce or perform out of their own commitment to the field and their need for self-
expression (Butler, 2000). As such, artists are used to treading the fine line between
artistic conventions and market demands in order to innovate in the marketplace.
These self-expressing artists then need to liaise with art professionals who have the
necessary social and cultural capital to filter through the creative output and bridge
the artistic discourse to a wider audience of private and public collectors, cultural and
corporate institutions, and art enthusiasts. Rodner and Thomson’s (2013) metaphor of
an “art machine” depicts the art market as an “interdependent branding mechanism”
or interlocking framework of legitimation made up of several functional cogs

" 3"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

including arts schools, galleries and dealers, art critics, auction houses, fairs and art
events, (private and public) collectors, and lastly museums, each of which acts as an
essential tastemaker in the cooperative construction of value in the arts (2013: 68). To
paraphrase Bourdieu (in Swartz, 1997), this “art machine” therefore acts as a branded
and branding structure of legitimation, where individual and institutional tastemakers
actively build a brand-name for visual artists, whilst at the same time feeding off the
brand-bestowing qualities of other cogs within the mechanism. Unlike previous
conceptualisations of the art world, the “art machine” reveals how insiders need to
(ideally) collaborate with one another in order to successfully and sustainably create a
name, reputation, cultural status and a market for the artists and the artworks within
the system. Regardless of this interdependency, the metaphor of an “art machine” also
testifies the need for some distance between private and public spheres of art
dissemination; a distance that provides some form of unbiased legitimation of the
visual arts at market and institutional level. Therefore, this branded and branding
mechanism works best at successfully and sustainably validating the creative output
of the entrepreneurial artist, if there exists a balance between public and private
support and consumption of the arts.

Driving Consumer Desire

Beyond this mechanical metaphor, we should also consider that products from
the creative industries do not always overlap with consumer desires and can often
result in commercial failure (Hirschman, 1983). Nevertheless, although the practice
of product-centred marketing by self oriented creators is condemned by the prevailing
philosophy of marketing management, Hirschman maintains that artists challenge
consumers in a positive way: “if consumers are only presented with what they want or
readily accept then the potential for social change and intellectual diversity is
curtailed” (1983: 49). Indeed, this logic is at play in successful technology companies
such as Apple who adopt product-focused marketing.
Drawing on Hirschman’s seminal paper on artistic creativity, Fillis (2006;
2010) agrees that artists’ creative output does not primarily respond to consumer
desires or interests. Although the artwork may not be viewed as a commodity during
the initial Creation Phase (Drummond, 2006) it does however become “a traded good
once it is brought to the market place” (Meyer and Even, 1998: 273). Therefore,

" 4"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

artists, whose works “flow from their own internal desires”, may also seek acceptance
for their innovative products in that:
self-oriented artists […] – as product centered marketers - do not purposely
design products that are at odds with peer and mass market consumer values
[instead they] create to communicate a personal vision or satisfy an inner need
for self-expression. Rather than seeking creative guidance from peers or the
public, they follow their own inclinations and then present to others […] they
believe that by creating something that vividly expresses their values and
emotions, the audience will be moved to accept their perspective.

(Hirschman, 1983:48)

Figure'1')'Tiers'of'oriented'creativity'adapted'from'Hirschman's''Aesthetics,'Ideologies'
and'the'Limits'of'the'Marketing'Concept''(1983:'49)'

Meyer and Even equate the contemporary artist with a “financially dependent
innovator and entrepreneur [who] does not find products for the customer, but seeks
customers for his products” (1998: 273-4; see also Gielen, 2013). In this sense, Fillis
agrees with the paradigm of the artist as market-creator, in that they are non-
conformist, risk-takers, or the “owner-manager of a micro-business” (2011: 15). In
Hirschman’s diagram (Figure 1), self-oriented creativity lies at the heart of the
creative process, so that the primary audience is the creator themself and the prime
objective is self-expression. For Meyer and Even, “in self-oriented marketing, the
artist is manufacturer and first customer of his own work” (1998: 273). Progressing
from self-satisfying creativity, Hirschman recognises the value for the creative artist of
peer and professional recognition, a recognition that may translate into symbolic,
cultural or even economic reward. Money-value is then prime when success equals
wide public acceptance. In Fillis’ interpretation

" 5"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

self-oriented artists create to communicate a personal vision with a view to

acquiring peer approval and the potential for niche or mass audience appeal.
By creating something that vividly expresses their values and emotions, the
audience might then be persuaded to accept their perspective.
(2011: 16)

However, economists Cowen and Tabarrok (2000) envisage artists facing a

sharply distinguished choice between creating art to please themselves (self-
satisfaction) and creating art primarily for an existing market or taste. Their paper
maps levels of artist self-satisfaction into the “empirical categories of high versus
low art and avant-garde versus popular art” (2000: 233). In contrast to Hirschman’s
sequential view of the artist as self-oriented creator (above), Cowen and Tabarrok
sharply distinguish the “high” artist, who, creating for themself, may only accidently
find consumers who share their tastes, giving them pecuniary rewards, as against the
“low” artist who, driven by market incentives, creates to please a pre-existing public.
This distinction becomes problematic when considering the success of artists such as
Hirst and Warhol as discussed later in this paper. Cowen and Tabarrok (2000)
observe that high art flourishes in more prosperous societies while in low-wage
countries artists tend to produce lower level or folk art for a low-end market rather
than to suit their own tastes. This restricts the possibilities of such lower wage
countries coming to cultural prominence, since latter artist’s production, according to
Cowen and Tabarrok (2000), will necessarily be perceived of as lower quality. In
money terms, a “high” artist deviating from established market taste pays, according
to these writers, a high price for their self-indulgence. As the article progresses
through mathematical formulas and graphs, the writers reiterate the gulf between
“high” and “low” art and the respective rewards and risks of both for the artist.
Esteva-Grillet (2009) similarly distinguishes between the artist’s catering to the
tastes of an established market or, preferably, opting for self-oriented creativity,
despite the economic risks entailed by the latter. He emphatically dismisses the
“intellectually inferior” complacency of established taste, and urges artists to go
beyond merely seeking market or cultural recognition, and searching instead for
“what still has to be done […] instead of looking backwards enthusiastically at the
road he has already travelled” (Esteva-Grillet, 2009: 92). Himself an artist, Abbing
also distinguishes commercial from non-commercial artists in their creative
orientations:

" 6"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

the well-being of a commercial artist depends on the external rewards like

money, recognition, fame and not on the ‘making of art’. A non-commercial
artist, one ‘selflessly’ devoted to art, on the other hand, is only concerned with
the ‘making of art’. There are no external rewards.
(2002: 282)

Such categorisations appear to ignore the existence of reputable and

(financially) successful artists, who establish a name for themselves and their
‘serious’ artistic discourse, whilst using their creativity to their own advantage on the
open (art) market. Despite their enthusiasm for the artist-as-entrepreneur, Cowen and
Tabarrok (2000) fail to acknowledge the vital art network that surrounds and supports
creative artists, nurturing taste, consumer market and reputation even for self-oriented
artists, referring throughout to the “pecuniary” or “non-pecuniary” benefits that artists
must choose between:
[they] see the choice artists face in marketing their work as between wishing
to secure pecuniary, or monetary advantages from selling to the market or to
acquire the non-pecuniary benefits of following their own tastes in creating
what they want.
(Fillis, 2011: 17)
Not once, however, do Cowen and Tabarrok mention the seminal studies of
Bourdieu (1984, 1993), and his theories on symbolic as opposed to economic capital.
Bourdieu’s vision of the interrelationship between money and culture in society is
more convincing than the analysis offered by Cowen and Tabarrok and is deservedly
more relied upon by scholars within the field of arts and beyond. Bourdieu’s vision
also corresponds more closely to the reality of art in society, where an art mechanism
integrates even self-pleasing art within the levels of taste and acceptance that exist in
the fabric of society.

Creativity and Competitive Advantage

In the business world, creative enterprises, following artistic models,
advocate for artistic integrity, self-definition and ideological independence
(Hirschman, 1983). Fillis (2002) regards creativity as the driver of competitive
advantage, which, although intangible by nature, represents immeasurable value for
both the individual and the firm. Although marketing practices have been applied
widely across the art field, Fillis is still concerned that there remains a “barrier”
between the arts and business, where the arts was considered to “exist as an

" 7"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

individual entity without any involvement from the business world” (2011: 11).
Managers must question the usefulness of current marketing theories and adopt a
creative, more entrepreneurial, approach to marketing. Atkinson takes exception to
Degot’s concept of the manager-as-artist, preferring the term “creative manager”,
but reaffirms Degot’s insistence that creative management requires an “all embracing
view of things which goes beyond the traditional boundaries” (Atkinson, 2007: 66).
Chong maintains that arts managers create markets for art, rather than giving the
market the art it already wants, so that “artistic vision takes precedence over market
conditions” (2010: 6). However, the problem of allowing self oriented creativity
and free flow thinking without control is that corporate purpose and direction may be
lost. This alleged loss of direction does not, however, outweigh the power of
creativity, which acts as strategic weapon for the innovative corporation. Fillis
(2002) observes how creativity becomes more difficult to instil later in life and, for
best results, should be encouraged at the initial stages of the business. Elaborating
on Hirschman’s core creative self, Fillis (2002) believes that the art and marketing
interface follows a sequence of self-belief, innovative thought, initiation of ideas and,
finally, creativity.
Anderson et al. (2009a) draw attention to the “thinking outside the canvas”
attitude of German performance artist, Joseph Beuys (1921-1986), who displayed a
radical approach to the philosophy and processes of creativity. Stating that creativity
was the “true capital of human beings”, Beuys defines three distinct levels of
creativity: personal creativity (the active form of thinking), including inspiration,
intuition and imagination; process creativity (or the sculptural theory), which actively
shapes the situation; and collective creativity (or social sculpture), encompassing the
creative dialogue and human interaction (Anderson et al., 2009a: 70). The case study
concludes that looking at Beuys’ understanding and approach to creativity can help
managers to work more creatively themselves and encourage their staff to do the
same.
With globalisation as a potential opportunity and/or threat for today’s
managers, Anderson et al. (2009b) also recall the tactics of adoption, integration and
fusion used by artists in the late 19th century: the adoption method implies embracing
a foreign technique; integration aims to incorporate a foreign style into a current
established market; fusion is a combination of traditional art and theory concepts with
new foreign influences. Perhaps too prescriptively, Anderson et al. (2009b), insist

" 8"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

that the global manager of the 21st century, following the artists’ example, adopt best
foreign practice strategies in order to compete internationally, integrate by re-
evaluating long established value chains and fuse the best elements of various
strategies together. This echoes Degot’s opinion that “good managerial work is that
which, during each period, takes the best advantage of the degree of freedom, and
adapts best to the constraints inherent in the social, cultural and political
environments” (Degot, 1987: 41).
Beyond the sharp distinction between the solely creative, self-oriented artist
vis à vis the market-led, ‘lower-level’ commercial artist, the following sections will
explore how visual artists in fact play the art game to their advantage by moulding
their symbolic worth into capital gain. An increasing focus on brand equity and
brand reputation (Aaker and Joachimsthaler, 2000), in mainstream marketing
requires such brands to consider the balance of both economic and symbolic value,
just as art brands must. Beyond the need to ensure brand awareness, perceived
quality, brand association and the all important brand loyalty, as defined by Aaker
and Joachimstahler (2000: 17), there are important lessons that can be learned by
looking to art brands. In this paper we show through some key examples how visual
artists create allure, desirability, demand, and cultural prestige around the unique
brand of their artistic discourse, an insight that will be particularly useful for
mainstream brands as well.

Symbolic and Economic Capital – shaping the artist’s brand

Cowen and Tabarrok (2000) consider that artists face a black-or-white choice
between making money by painting to suit the market and, at the other extreme,
painting to suit themself, which might result in their making little or no money at all.
Barrere and Santagata (1999) see artists who follow the art for art’s sake approach
tending towards the latter option, disdaining commercial interests and financial gain.
Bourdieu (1984, 1993), on the other hand, offers an alternative approach to the arts, as
he argues that the two extremes posited above are not in fact mutually exclusive.
Recognising that all activity is basically self-interested, Bourdieu perceives that
intellectual activities may pretend not to be interested in financial gain, but that this is
in fact a sham because “all cultural production is reward-oriented and guided by a
desire for real or symbolic profit or advantage” (Swartz, 1997: 67); in the end,
symbolic profit is just as rewarding as immediate economic profit and may well

" 9"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

translate into economic capital for the artist in the long run. In Bourdieu’s language,
symbolic profit equates “symbolic capital”, that is “a degree of accumulated prestige,
celebrity, consecration or honour … founded on knowledge … and recognition”
(Bourdieu, 1993: 7). Symbolic capital acts as “denied capital” (Swartz, 1997: 43) or a
“principle of disinterestedness” (Webb et al., 2012: 150) and therefore disguises the
potent underlying interested relations to which it is related, giving artists legitimation.
In this sense, artworks “are primarily designed not to make money, but to make some
sort of statement about the artist’s vision or the social universe” (Webb et al., 2012:
150).
Regarding the values of the visual artist, Caves notes that as early as art
school, “concessions to commercial taste are discouraged, because they impugn the
artist’s seriousness” (2002: 22). Artists that in fact create for a pre-established
consumer public (for instance selling watercolour paintings at popular tourist
destinations) fail to accumulate - in Bourdieu’s terms - the necessary symbolic capital
to be taken seriously in the established art world or cultural field and will, therefore,
be deemed creators of “not ‘real’ art” (in Webb et al., 2012: 159-160). We can draw
some parallels here with the mainstream companies which are moving in this
direction, where product, societal or environmental issues should be foregrouned over
economic gain, while at the same time, satisfying the need for economic returns on
investment. Where visual artists point to their creative impulse as central to their
work, companies such as Apple, Samsung and Google – to only mention a few - focus
on their superior technology and purposeful social connectivity.
What we can learn from the art world is that the “autonomous” artist (versus
the ‘tacky’ money-driven “heteronomous” one described above) deliberately works
against an “economic logic” which can later be translated into economic rewards
(Webb et al., 2012: 160). In his brief yet playful reflection on the workings of the art
world - The Painted Word - Wolfe highlights the steps artists may take to establish
this symbolic capital and subsequently envisage a market for their work:
First you do everything possible to make sure your world is antibourgeois, that
it defies bourgeois tastes, that it mystifies the mob, the public, that it
outdistances the insensible middle-class multitudes by light-years of subtlety
and intellect – and then, having succeeded admirably, you ask with a sense of
See-what-I-mean? outrage: look, they don’t even buy our products! (usually
referred to as ‘quality art’).
(1975: 60-61)

" 10"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

Velthuis (2005) explains that ‘denegation’ in the art world ostensibly denies
interest in monetary gain whilst at the same time striving to attribute reputation,
institutional recognition and legitimate power for art and artists: this symbolic capital
can then be transformed into economic capital. Denegation includes writers who
oppose the profit motive in the culture industry as compromising artistic integrity.
This paradox of rejecting monetary gain, which can result in monetary gain, is now
being managed by a number of mainstream companies, which have recognised their
customers’ desire for integrity. Chong cites Adorno’s 1991 objection that “the entire
practice of the culture industry transfers the profit motive naked onto cultural forms”
(2010: 15; Adorno, 1991). In a more dramatic denial of economic capital, Abbing
attests that “in order to maintain their high status the arts reject commercial values
and deny the economy”, or at least during the initial stages of their career to build a
reputation within the cultural field (2002: 48).
For Becker, the artist’s reputation, or symbolic capital, reinforces the work
they create in that “we value more a work done by an artist we respect just as we
respect more an artist whose work we have admired” (1982: 23). Ultimately,
however, reputation and peer recognition rarely suffice on their own, and self-
proclaimed non-commercial artists may suffer the “clashes between idealism and
commercialism” (Fillis, 2006: 31). Such clashes with idealism and commercialism
also play out in the realm of the conscious consumer where the consumer wishes to
support companies with more than a commercial imperative. Organisations such as
Toms Shoes which give money to good causes for every shoe purchased, the Body
Shop which lead the beauty industry in avoiding animal testing and Marks and
Spencer whose Plan A showed their commitment to ethical business have
foregrounded their social and environmental policy rather than their economic
ambitions. Of course, the conscious consumer is only one segment in today’s market,
but mainstream companies can pay attention to the benefits derived from such a
model. In today’s art world, the artist’s reputation and symbolic capital, if managed
effectively, can and will be translated into economic capital, financial success and a
sustainable career. Anderson et al. draw attention to those avant garde artists of the
19th and 20th centuries who did in fact make money from their work as “they
developed personal business strategies: their artwork and personality became one
product, what today we could call a brand” (2009b: 52). By identifying themselves as
a “target group” or desirable brand, artists, adopting a marketing approach, improve

" 11"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

the creative process of fulfilling their own personal and professional expectations
(Fillis, 2004a).
Although artists may be considered to embody the “anti-marketing”
‘schoolyard insult’, that is, a product-centred paradigm, they do seek both symbolic
and economic capital, since “it is not true that artists have no interest in the efficient
management of their lives” (Butler, 2000: 350; see also Fillis, 2011: 17).
Commercially active artists, dependent on market forces, can achieve this efficient
management only if they become managers of themselves, so that, in the realm of art
for business’ sake, these artists cum managers “spend their time controlling the
system of sales and the process of valorisation of their works of art” (Barrere and
Santagata, 1999: 35). Actively participating in a range of marketing practices within
the art world, the artist acts as owner or manager of the art they produce (Fillis, 2006;
Schroeder, 2010). Hirschman differentiates between those creative artists working to
earn critical acclaim and recognition (symbolic capital), whose motivation is self-
expression and self-respect, and those working for commercial success and to earn a
living (economic capital) (1983: 49). The savviest artist-manager will successfully
satisfy all levels of creativity, acquiring both symbolic and economic capital, so that
artists focusing on reputation development may generate long-term social and
economic benefits as well (Barrere and Santagata, 1999). Brown suggests the origins
of the concept of the artist cum manager can be dated back to the emergence of the
“marketing savvy” Modernist artist, Marcel Duchamp; “an astute self-publicist, a self-
branding marketing man of considerable skill” (2010: 259)."""
Witness to today’s art market, Fillis (2006) observes how artists have become
master marketers and self promoters, utilising their celebrity status to enhance
demand for their work: artists adopt an entrepreneurial attitude, take risks, ignore the
customer’s needs, and create a market for their innovative product. This involves
constant and consistent effort, so that fame achieved does not imply fame guaranteed.
Febres (1999) stresses the ephemeral quality of artistic success amidst ever-changing
tastes and demands for art. The artist must then manipulate the mechanisms that
brought them fame in the first place if they are to keep their position of prominence
and recognition. Placed within a wider context, artists operate within an art system, so
that “to achieve success in the field […] artists must find a balance between
understanding and obeying the rules of art (such as valuing disinterestedness), and
making concessions to the economic field” (Webb et al., 2012: 162). Invention and

" 12"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

reinvention become stock in trade of the visual artists as discussed in relation to Andy
Warhol by Kerrigan et al. (2011). The following section will therefore explore
relevant cases where visual artists have effectively become brands within their (art)
market by accruing both symbolic and economic worth in order to illustrate the need
for mainstream brands to adopt such an approach.

Examples of Artists as Managers of their Brands

Fillis (2004a: 133) qualifies Salvador Dali (1904-1989) as “one of the greatest
self-publicising marketers of all time”. At once a risk-taker and prudent networker
reliant on the proven resource of faithful patrons of the arts, Dali both shaped the
market and, at the same time, predicted future independent market trends (see also
Brown, 2010). Like the Dadaists before them, the Surrealists lead the way of
“experiential marketing” within the arts by broadcasting their work and their message
to wider and more diverse audiences (Brown, 2010: 259). Using film, television,
magazines and pamphlets to disseminate his work and promote his image, Dali, as
“marketing mastermind” (Brown, 2010: 260), extended his reputation through
successful product differentiation, releasing jewellery, furniture and a lobster-shaped
telephone for multiple production while establishing the Dali Foundation and
Museum to extend and manage demand for his business and artistic competencies.
More recently, Pop artist Andy Warhol (1928-1987) developed a globally
recognisable style through his reproducible simulations of existing brand products
(e.g., the Campbell’s soup can). Warhol’s success as an artist of mass production and
brand names is partly due to his ability to conduct consumer research within the art
market and promote himself and his celebrity status as the ultimate commodity.
Warhol’s background in advertising and graphic design played a pivotal role in his
creative development, and he understood how the emotional relationship between the
brand-loyal consumer and the branded product transcends the characteristics of the
product itself. As a result, Warhol well knew “what sells and how to sell it”
(Schroeder, 1997: 478). His production cunningly specialised in silk-screen pieces
that are easily reproduced for a growing public (Cowen and Tabarrok, 2000: 243). He
witnessed the increasing popularity of department stores and shopping malls in tune
with consumer society’s obsession with consumption and material wealth, wherein
the mall substitutes the museum. Warhol takes this notion further and converts his
artist’s studio into ‘The Factory’, a black box that would conceal whether Warhol or

" 13"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

an employed art worker had actually produced the artworks (Velthuis, 2005).
Warhol’s Factory produced en masse and it also fostered individual creativity as the
team experimented in mass-production, repetitions and purposely-incorporated
“mistakes”, such as smudges and misalignments, to distort the recognisable model for
artistic effect. The Factory gave life to Warhol’s priorities as he himself expressed
them: “making money is art and working is art and good business is the best art”
(Warhol, 1975: 92). Warhol personally kept an account of what he had produced and
what this was worth in monetary terms. Drowning in self-absorption would stultify
the artist, who should “always count up [his] pictures” to always be aware of what he
is worth economically (Warhol, 1975: 86).
Innovator and icon within the Pop Art movement, Warhol drew upon images
familiar in popular, mass-produced culture and transformed these into his own
expression, rather as he untiringly worked with the aid of cosmetic surgery and
multiple wigs on his own personal “look”. As man and as oeuvre, Warhol achieved a
brand identity and equity that has made his personal and professional style “one of the
most globally recognizable styles in the history of art” (Schroeder, 1997: 478). In
doing so, Kerrigan et al. (2011) noted how Warhol skilfully negotiated the acquisition
and development of social, cultural and symbolic capital through co-branding with
other celebrities and creating what Rojek (2001) referred to as celetoids. So, despite
the focus on amassing economic capital, Warhol recognised the need for recognition
through social, cultural and symbolic capital. Indeed Warhol’s struggle as an artist
was not for economic gain, but for acceptance into the art world (Kerrigan et al.
2011).
Schroeder further equates successful artists to brand managers who are
“actively engaged in developing, nurturing and promoting themselves as recognisable
products in the cultural sphere” (2005: 1292; see also Schroeder, 2010; Goodwin,
2008). Artists, similar to brands, become dependent on market forces, fierce
competition and life cycles. Schroeder’s ‘Artist as Brand Manager’ (2005) elaborates
on the work of Warhol and studies American conceptual artists Barbara Kruger (b.
1945) and photographer, model and director Cindy Sherman (b. 1954). According to
Schroeder, Warhol extracted the commodity out of its consumer context,
repositioning it in the art gallery, therefore endowing the commodity with artistic
worth and challenging the relationship between popular and high culture. In her
forceful yet visually austere graphics, Kruger interrogates the consumer’s sense of

" 14"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

identity by juxtaposing contradictory themes; her notorious “I shop therefore I am”

plays on the notion of a brand-world Utopia where consumerism rules (Schroeder,
2005: 1297). Sherman looks more deeply into the construction of identity and
meaning management. Her film-stills highlight the darker side of branding, as people
are transformed into commodities. Each in their own way, all three American artists
manipulated elements of branding to promote themselves and their work to a wider
audience.
The British art scene was revitalised in the early 1990s by the emergence and
skilful promotion of the Young British Artists (YBAs). By exploiting mundane
objects and repositioning them into the world of art, the YBAs created a “form of
street-level alchemy whereby the ordinary was transformed into something uncanny”
using the most unlikely materials, including human blood, kebabs and animal parts
(Muir, 2009: 113). Legitimated by the earlier example of Duchamp’s Readymades,
the YBAs, as well as the art professionals who began to back them, leapt to fame as
they launched low art into the “stratosphere of profundity” (Muir, 2009: 115).
Goldsmith’s student Hirst dominated the creation and promotion of the YBA
movement, organising the Freeze exhibit (1988), where he first encountered collector
and advertising guru, Charles Saatchi. Most famous of the YBA generation, Damien
Hirst (b. 1965) is considered today by art enthusiasts and business-people alike to be
the prime example of the artist cum brand manager (Bradshaw et al., 2010). Liaising
with collector and art promoter Charles Saatchi and with Tate Gallery director and
curator Nicholas Serota and working within a coherent network of likeminded peers,
Hirst became and remained the predominant contemporary artist of the 1990s. In 1993
he was invited by the Venice Biennale committee to exhibit at the Palazzo within the
Giardini, where his ‘Mother and Child Divided’ (a dead calf and cow sawn in half
and preserved in acrylic and formaldehyde) aroused controversy and an almost
unbelievable craving for more. Interest from star galleries and dealers as well as solo
and group exhibits in the world’s leading museums broadened Hirst’s consumer
audience to a global scale. To accommodate an insatiable hunger for his work, Hirst
mirrored Warhol in his artistic output: “I like the idea of a factory to produce work,
which separates the work from the ideas, I wouldn’t like a factory to produce the
ideas” (cited in Thompson, 2008: 72). Hirst invests in industrial production strategies
that ensure that there is always just enough material available to keep pace with
collector demand. There are around 1,000 ‘unique’ spot paintings of Hirst’s in

" 15"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

existence, without there being any apparent decline in the public’s desire to purchase
any one of these. Excessive catering to public demand would normally compromise
an artist’s integrity and price-worthiness, though not, evidently, in the case of Damien
Hirst, whose Sotheby’s 2-day auction in a period of economic downturn garnered a
sensational £111 million (Thornton, 2009; Fillis, 2010; Horowitz, 2011). This event
further increased Hirst’s prominence and success. Though auction-houses may deny
that they influence collectors’ choices, a Sotheby’s sale of such magnitude inevitably
enhances the provenance and hence future pricing for any and all of Hirst’s
productions.
Despite mass-production techniques such as employing some 40 assistants to
work on his Spot, Spin and Butterfly pieces, Hirst remains confident in the value of his
brand name, where a signature carries the meaning. If the successful artist as brand
manager efficiently markets himself, as exemplified by Warhol or Hirst, the artist
together with an independently prominent brand product may also attain huge
symbolic and economic capital. What we can see from both of these examples is that
when economic success comes, symbolic capital is threatened and in both cases, there
was a need for the artists to work on establishing and maintaining symbolic capital in
order to retain economic capital. This need for balance is evident in mainstream
business where announcements of very high profits can be met with high levels of
criticism by consumer groups, as companies are seen to exploit the consumer in
pursuit of such profit. However, companies such as Apple and Google counter this
criticism with constant attention directed towards their investment in innovation and
new technology. Here, their product focus acts as symbolic capital.
Sound business principles ensure Louis Vuitton’s dominance of its chosen
segment of the luxury fashion market and, alongside Vuitton since 2000, the Japanese
artist Takashi Murakami (b. 1962). Born and educated in Tokyo, Murakami is as
much an enterprise as an artist, so that “to experience [him], you have to experience
the commercial elements of his work” (Thornton, 2009: 203). An admirer of Warhol’s
attitude to artistic production, Murakami created the Hiropon Factory, which he
renamed Kaikai Kiki Co. Ltd. in 2002 when he reconceptualised his entire artistic
operation into a marketing and communication company. The company, based in
Tokyo and New York, currently employs about 90 artists, designers and sales
representatives producing art, merchandise and acting as an agent and producer for 7
other Japanese artists. Playing down the importance of an artist’s particular style or

" 16"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

the power of a single signature, Murakami insists that no trace of his or any other
painter’s hand should be noticeable in the work. However, Murakami recognises the
work of each of his assistants and duly includes their names, up to 35, on the back of
each piece. Similarly, American conceptual artist Fred Wilson acknowledges positive
dynamics that occur when artist and “fabricator” collaborate in the creation process:
When someone else makes your work, who they are goes into it as well. If
they’re connected to it, the fabricator can develop a wonderful relationship
with the artist… Each person brings a different talent and aspect to it. It can
take you in another direction.
(cited in Petry, 2011: 29)

Although Murakami as brand manager focuses on productivity and

sustainability, he does not lose sight of his creative roots and the art world that
surrounds him: “My concentration is how to survive long-term and how to join with
the contemporary feeling. To focus on nothing besides profits is, by my values, evil”
(Thornton, 2009: 198). Murakami’s shrewd relationship to commercial and cultural
industries has brought him successful co-branding with a luxury brand (Louis
Vuitton), appearances at the world-famous Venice Biennale and Art Basel,
representation by superstar dealers and galleries (Larry Gagosian) as well as
retrospectives at major international museums (MoCA in Los Angeles and the Bilbao
Guggenheim). Symbolically, his denouncement of the pursuit of purely economic
gain protects his brand from accusations of ‘selling out’ and allows symbolic and
economic capital to coexist.
A different kind of ‘success’ story is explored by Schroeder (2006) in his
‘Aesthetics awry’ case study of American realist painter, Thomas Kinkade (1958-
2012). Not unlike Murakami, Kinkade created his own enterprise, Media Arts Group,
which is traded on the New York Stock Exchange and produced a wide range of
decorative commodities including paintings, cards, puzzles, mugs, calendars and
nightlights. Trained at the University of California’s Art Center College of Design,
Kinkade created pastoral pieces (thatched cottages in country gardens, lighthouses on
romantic, rocky outcroppings) that tap into McCracken’s (2005) notion of
“homeyness”, as these sentimental landscapes and seascapes impart a heart-warming
vision of “family, community and home” (Schroeder, 2006: 93) to North American
living rooms. Admirers of Kinkade’s trademarked art commodities can add to their
collection at any of his 350 franchised galleries, online, via the ebay auction site and
shopping channels. Kinkade envisioned a huge market for his work within the homes

" 17"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

and businesses of middle-class America, as “the walls of the home are the new
frontiers for branding” (Schroeder, 2006: 90). Kinkade fits well within Cowen and
Tabarrok’s category of “low” artist, producing poor quality for the masses whilst
suppressing his own tastes in creativity. In an apparent self-contradiction, Cowen
and Tabarrok stress the profitability of mass-produced art and, at the same time assert
that “a painter who suppresses his own tastes is unlikely to greatly increase his
audience” (2000: 240). Certainly, for Kinkade low art meant a wider, not smaller,
audience and thus more sales. Greedy for success, Kinkade embraced mass-
production and licensing, which McCracken feels sits uneasily with the purported
homeyness of the artwork: “Homey phenomena […] are not supposed to be the work
of a premeditation, routinized processes (mass manufacture) or anonymous
calculation” (2005: 29). Schroeder (2006) warns that Kinkade’s effort to aestheticize
management, disguising business as something more spiritual, is unconvincing.

Discussion and Conclusion – the importance of symbolic capital in the branding

narrative
Drawing on examples from the art market, we highlight the importance of
foregrounding symbolic capital over economic imperatives. In an era of increasing
reliance on customer creativity, our examination of the art market can provide
valuable insight for mainstream business. By considering value beyond standard
economic measures, which have traditionally dominated marketing literature, our
paper explores the creation of meaning through a collective interaction between
agents within the art mechanism, who utilise their cultural and social capital as a
means of validating and positioning artists within the market. Our exploration also
highlights how, as entrepreneurial product-centred creators, artists purposefully
challenge the market and mould new tastes by amassing symbolic capital (or prestige)
throughout their careers, which they then can translate into economic capital via the
mechanics of the ‘art machine’. Although the artist’s primary motivation for creation
may not be financial success and many may even deny the influence of the market on
what they choose to create, we have witnessed how artists do in fact recognise the
importance for both economic and symbolic success of their image (or brand) as well
as the need for good connections (i.e. networks within an art system). Today’s artists,
acting as owner/managers of their art product, can enjoy a life of wealth and celebrity
status while actively participating in a “superstar” art market (Cowen and Tabarrok,

" 18"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

2000: 241), controlling the supply of their work, manipulating prices and managing
the brand name they create for themselves and their art.
Just as ‘creativity’ is a central element of the symbolic capital of artists,
mainstream business can similarly identify the nature of their symbolic appeal. In the
case of companies such as Apple and Samsung, this lies in investment in technology
and user design. For Tom’s shoes, Fairtrade coffee and Cadbury’s chocolate it is
ensuring that profits are returned to those further back in the value chain. By making
the profit motive secondary, such organisations have shown the importance of
symbolic capital for constructing their brand narratives, and as such, these brand
narratives have resulted in strong brands based on measures of brand equity and their
corporate brands.
In this paper, we have highlighted the importance of wider stakeholders
(consumers and tastemakers) in establishing and understanding value, as value within
the art world is not purely measured in economic terms. As can be seen by the
discussion on Thomas Kincade, amassing economic wealth from the production of
artworks, within Rodner and Thompson’s (2013) ‘art machine’ metaphor, without the
accompanying social and cultural capital of legitimising agents, does not in fact
validate the work as ‘high art’. Similarly, immensely prolific artists such as Warhol
and Hirst have had to prove their place in the realm of art, despite earning high
financial returns from their commodified creative output. A deep suspicion of playing
to the tastes of the market, rather than pursuing an art for art’s sake maxim, means
that artists must carefully balance various forms of capital simultaneously.
Visual artists have developed skills in understanding how the art network
influences, how their ‘brand’ is considered, and how symbolic capital is bestowed on
them. As pointed out by Currid (2007), these artists understand the need to actively
engage in these networks in order to secure such symbolic capital. Their brand
narrative relies on the narratives produced by cultural agents such as critics, curators
and collectors. Similarly, in the social media age, mainstream brand narratives are
developed and symbolic capital accrued through a similar network of cultural agents.
These agents incorporate established journalists writing about the specific sector, such
as technology, fashion, sports equipment, as well as new entrants such as influential
bloggers, user reviewers and so on. Looking to the art world, specifically how artists
foreground their creative capital in such networks, can allow mainstream brands
insight into how to present themselves within these networks.

" 19"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

What this focus on social, cultural and symbolic capital points to, is a
collective understanding of value based on fulfilling specific cultural and social
requirements. With brands increasingly operating in a social media age, such
collective notions of value, reputation and desirability have been highlighted here.
The interrelationship between the various forms of capital (be it social, cultural,
symbolic or economic) are apparent from this examination of the art world, where
brands need to accrue symbolic and financial worth via a socially and culturally-
endowed art market structure to ensure their sustainable presence on the market.
Similarly, the focus on creativity and the cooperative nature of the art mechanism is
brought to the fore in this study. As consumers are increasingly asked to engage in
creative interactions with brands, looking to the art world for examples of such
collective action and creativity becomes important. Despite the myth of the lone
artist, this paper illustrates the prevalence of a collective creation and valuation of art.
As brands increasingly invite consumers to contribute creatively to the development
of brand identity, the art world reveals that a collective and challenging creativity
within the visual arts can purposefully mould a brand name and longevity through the
various forms of capital.

" 20"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

REFERENCES

Aaker, D. A., and Joachimstahler, E. (2000) Brand Leadership, Simon and Schuster,
London.

Abbing, H. (2002) Why are artists poor? The exceptional economy of the arts,
Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.

Adorno, T. (1991) The Culture Industry: Selected essays on mass culture. Reprint,
Routledge, New York and London, 2008.

Anderson, J., Kupp, M., and Reckhenrich, J. (2009a) ‘Understanding creativity: the
manager as artist’ Business Strategy Review. 20 (2) pp. 68-73.

Anderson, J., Kupp, M., and Reckhenrich, J. (2009b) ‘Art lessons for the global
manager’, Business Strategy Review. 20 (1) pp. 50-57.

Atkinson, D. M., (2007) Thinking the art of management: stepping into ‘Heidegger’s
shoes’. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY.

Barrere, C. and Santagata, W. (1999) ‘Defining art: from the Brancusi trial to the
economics of artistic semiotic goods’, International Journal of Arts
Management 1 (2), pp. 28-38.

Baxter, L. (2010) ‘From Luxury to Necessity: the Changing Role of Qualitative

Research in the Arts’ in O’Reilly, D., and Kerrigan, F. (eds.) Marketing the Arts
– A fresh Approach. Routledge, London, pp. 121-140.

Becker, H.S. (1982) Art Worlds. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste.

Translated by Richard Nice. Reprint, Routledge, London, 2008.

Bourdieu, P. (1993) The Field of Cultural Production. Reprint, Blackwell, Oxford,

2008.

Bradshaw, A., Kerrigan, F., and Holbrook, M. B. (2010) ‘Challenging Conventions in

Arts Marketing: Experiencing the Skull’ in O’Reilly, D., and Kerrigan, F. (eds.)
Marketing the Arts – A fresh Approach. Routledge, London, pp. 5-17.

Brown, S. (2010) ‘The Brand Stripped Bare by its Marketers, Even’ in O’Reilly, D.,
and Kerrigan, F. (eds.) Marketing the Arts – A fresh Approach. Routledge,
London, pp. 257-266.

Butler, P. (2000) ‘By popular demand: marketing the arts’, Journal of Marketing
Management. 16, (4) pp. 343-364.

Caves, R.E. (2000) Creative industries: contracts between art and commerce.
Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.

" 21"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

Chong, D. (2010) Arts Management, 2nd edn. Routledge, London.

Cowen, T., and Tabarrock, A. (2000) ‘An Economic Theory of Avant-Garde and
Popular Art, or High and Low Culture’, Southern Economic Journal, 67 (2) pp.
232-253.

Currid, E. (2007) The Warhol Economy: How Fashion, Art & Music Drive New York
City, Princeton University Press, New Jersey.

Danto, A. C. (1964) ‘The Artworld’, The Journal of Philosophy, 61 (19), pp. 571-584.

Degot, V. (1987) ‘Portrait of the manager as an artist’, Dragon: The SCOS Journal,
Issue: Art and the Organisation, 2 (3) pp. 13-50.

Drummond, K. (2006) ‘The migration of art from museum to market: consuming

Caravaggio’, Marketing Theory and Practice, 6 (1) pp. 85-105.

Esteva-Grillet, R. (2009) Imágenes contra la pared. Críticas y crónicas sobre arte,

1981-2007. Fundación para la Cultura Urbana (no. 73), Grupo de Empresas
Econoinvest, Caracas.

Febres, N. (1999) ‘Algunas reflexiones sobre el Mercado del arte’, in Pacanins, F. and
Vegas, J. (eds.) (1999) Invertir en Arte. Colección Econoinvest 2. Editorial Ex
Libris, Caracas, pp. 43-85.

Fillis, I. (2002) ‘An Andalusian dog or rising star? Creativity and the
marketing/entrepreneurship interface’, Journal of Marketing Management, 18
(3/4) pp. 379-395.

Fillis, I. (2004a) ‘The theory and practice of visual arts marketing’ in Kerrigan, F.,
Fraser, P., and Özbilgin, M. (Eds.) Arts Marketing. Elsevier Butterworth-
Heinemann, Burlington, MA, pp. 119-138.

Fillis, I. (2004b) ‘The entrepreneurial artist as marketer – lessons from small firm
literature’, International Journal of Arts Management, 7 (1) pp. 9-21.

Fillis, I. (2006) ‘Art for art’s sake or art for business sake: an exploration of artistic
product orientation’, The Marketing Review, 6 (1) pp. 29-40.

Fillis, I. (2009) ‘An evaluation of artistic influences on marketing theory and

practice’. Marketing Intelligence and Practice, 27 (6) pp. 753-774.

Fillis, I. (2010) ‘The Tension between Artistic and Market Orientation in Visual Art’
in O’Reilly, D., and Kerrigan, F. (Eds) Marketing the Arts – A fresh Approach.
London: Routledge,pp. 31-39.

Fillis, I. (2011) ‘The evolution and development of arts marketing research’, Arts
Marketing – An International Journal, 1 (1) pp. 11-25.

" 22"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

Gallagher, B.K. and Sowa, J.E. (2014) “Leveraging Social Media to Engage and
Retain: Arts/ culture organizations donors, members, and volunteers”, in
O’Reilly, D., Rentschler, R and Kirchner, T.A., The Routledge Companion to
Arts Marketing, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, pp. 170-179.

Gielen, P. (ed.) (2013) Institutional Attitudes: Instituting Art in a Flat World,

Amsterdam: Antennae Series (n. 8), Valiz.

Goodwin, J. (2008) (Consultant editor) The International Art Markets: the Essential
Guide for Collectors and Investors. London: Kogan Page.

Hede, A.M. (2014) “Arts Marketing and Web 2.0-Based Audience Development
Initiatives”, in O’Reilly, D., Rentschler, R and Kirchner, T.A., The Routledge
Companion to Arts Marketing, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, pp. 151-160.

Hirschman, E.C. (1983) ‘Aesthetics, ideologies and the limits of the marketing
concept’, Journal of Marketing, 47 (Summer) pp. 45-55.

Horowitz, N. (2011) Art of the Deal: Contemporary Art in a Global Financial

Market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Ind, N. (2006) ‘Beyond branding: from abstraction to cubism’. Journal of Product

and Brand Management. 15 (2) pp. 148-149.

Jenkins, R. (2002) Pierre Bourdieu. Revised Edition. Key Sociologists Series (Editor:
Peter Hamilton), Routledge, London.

Kerrigan, F., Fraser, P. and Özbilgin, M. (eds.) (2004) Arts Marketing. Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA.

Kerrigan, F., Brownlie, D., Hewer, P., and Daza-Le Touze, C. (2011) ‘“Spinning”
Warhol: Celebrity brand theoretics and the logic of the celebrity brand’, Journal
of Marketing Management, 27 (13-14), pp. 1504-1524.

McCracken, G. (2005) Culture and consumption II: markets, meaning, and brand
management. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN.

Meyer, J.A., and Even, R. (1998) ‘Marketing and Fine Arts – inventory of a
controversial relationship’, Journal of Cultural Economics, 22 (4), pp 271-283.

Muir, G. (2009) Lucky Kunst: the rise and fall of Young British Art. Aurum, London.

Muñiz, A., Norris, T., and Fine, G.A. (2014) ‘Marketing artistic careers: Pablo
Picasso as brand manager’, European Journal of Marketing, 48 (1/2), pp. 68-88.

O’Reilly, D., and Kerrigan, F. (2010) (Eds) Marketing the Arts – A fresh Approach,
Routledge, London.

Pacanins, F. and Vegas, J. (eds.) (1999) Invertir en Arte. Colección Econoinvest 2,

Editorial Ex Libris, Caracas.

" 23"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

Petry, M. (2011) The art of not making: the new artist/artisan relationship, Thames &
Hudson, London.

Preece, S. B. and Wiggins Johnson, J. (2014) ‘Web Strategies for Engaging

Audiences’, in O’Reilly, D., Rentschler, R and Kirchner, T.A., The Routledge
Companion to Arts Marketing, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, pp. 142-149.

Robertson, I. (ed.) (2005) Understanding International Art Markets and Management.

Routledge, Abingdon and New York.

Robertson, I. (2011) A new art from emerging markets. Lund Humphries, Surrey.

Robertson, I. and Chong, D. (eds.) (2008) The Art Business. Routledge, Abingdon.

Rodner, V.L. and Thomson, E. (2013) ‘The Art Machine: Dynamics of a value-
generating mechanism for contemporary art’, Arts Marketing – An International
Journal, 3 (1), pp. 58-72.

Rojek, C. (2001), Celebrity, Reaktion Books, London.

Schroeder, J.E. (1997) ‘Andy Warhol: consumer research’, Advances in Consumer

Research, 24, pp. 476-482.

Schroeder, J.E. (2002) Visual consumption. Routledge, London.

Schroeder, J.E. (2005) ‘Artist and the Brand’ European Journal of Marketing. 39
(11/12) pp.1201-1305

Schroeder, J.E. (2006) ‘Aesthetics awry: the painter of light™ and the
commodification of artistic values’, Consumption, Markets and Culture, 9 (2)
pp. 87-99.

Schroeder, J.E. (2010) ‘The Artist in Brand Culture’ in O’Reilly, D., and Kerrigan, F.
(2010) (Eds) Marketing the Arts – A fresh Approach. London: Routledge, pp.
18-30.

Swartz, D. (1997) Culture & Power. The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. The
University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.

Thompson, D. N. (2008) The $12 million stuffed shark: the curious economics of
contemporary art and auction houses. Aurum Press Ltd, London.

Thornton, S. (2009) Seven days in the art world. Granta, London.

Velthuis, O. (2005) Imaginary Economics: contemporary artists and the world of big
money. NAI Publishers, Rotterdam, Holland.

" 24"
 ©"Victoria"L."Rodner"&"Finola"Kerrigan"2014"

Warhol, A. (1975) The philosophy of Andy Warhol: from A to B and back again.
Penguin Books, London, Reprint, 2007.

Webb, J., Schirato, T., and Danaher, G. (2012) Understanding Bourdieu, SAGE
Publications, London.

Wolfe, T. (1975) The painted word. Picador, New York.

" 25"

View publication stats