Many children of past generations had a favourite, familiar and common hobby. Collecting coins and postage stamps; a means to get acquainted with the history, culture, languages, leaders and icons of countries far from one’s homeland. The Raj coins with the face of British monarchs on one side and the value of silver in Urdu on the other revealed the colonial imprint. Some boys and girls accumulated miniature models of cars, dolls, small crockery, butterfly wings, seashells, train tickets, marbles, etc.

This early activity, of acquiring things not for their monetary worth, but for their unusualness, attraction and personal liking is similar to art collectors’ task; those who build their possessions out of passion, often do not consider themselves ‘collectors’. Tiqui Atencio, a prominent collector of Latin American, pre-Columbian, and modern and contemporary art, writes about several major collectors she met, who “said, ‘I am not a collector, but I love art and I just need to live with it.’” This is probably the case in our surroundings as well. Only a few people would claim to be collectors. Most describe themselves as patrons, art lovers or connoisseurs.

Yet they spend huge amounts to acquire works of art, sometimes buying from galleries across the world, and occasionally bidding on new and upcoming talent. Still there is a reluctance in introducing oneself as a collector. It is rooted in more than one factor. Probably there is a desire to downplay one’s indulgence in frivolous items. Since art, modern and contemporary, is still not regarded as precious or antique – like a Buddhist statue, an Aztec jade skull or a Chinese vase from the Ming dynasty. The past not only adds authenticity and eternity to historic objects, but also enhances their value.

However, in today’s market, some artworks command incredible prices at auctions. On July 27, the Austrian painter Gustav Klimt’s Lady with a Fan was sold for 85.3 million pounds at Sotheby’s London, and became the “most expensive artwork ever auctioned in Europe.” (Another example of extravagant collecting is Comedian, 2019, by the Italian conceptual artist Maurizio Cattelan, a work made of a banana and duct tape. Two editions of the piece were sold for $120,000 at Art Basel Miami Beach). Works of Pakistani artists – Rashid Rana, Shahzia Sikander, Imran Qureshi, Salman Toor and Waqas Khan –fetch huge prices and are sought across the world.

What the Venezuelan-born collector Tiqui Atencio says is correct in our environment because one always has a guilty (pleasure) while purchasing artworks. It looks great hanging in one’s room, placed on a plinth or projected on the wall, but still it is the product of another person’s life, mind, creativity and passion. How could one become the single proprietor of all that. Especially if one realises that art-making is an intellectual/ imaginative pursuit, like writing a book of literature or composing a piece of music. Creative individuals produce without thinking about the remuneration or the audience’s responses. Thus, the work of great art usually defies the taste of the times and is often rejected, ridiculed and refused. Margaret Atwood, in her introduction to Danish author Karen Blixen’s book of short stories, informs that initially it was “rejected by several [US] publishers for usual reasons.” “It was New York that made her famous back in 1934 when Seven Gothic Tales took America by storm.”

The Impressionist Movement was rebuffed by the art circles of France. Some of the greatest artists, like Van Gogh, were penniless. Today their paintings are the most pricey treasures of an art museum, or a public collection. When painted, these canvases were generally ignored; because their makers opted for something daring, original and honest, kowing that their work won’t be exhibited at public places or purchased.

If one takes the example of impressionist painters, or of a young Picasso, or of an early Rashid Rana, one recognises that artists, in a way, are in confrontation with the established norms of appreciation – that cater to the taste and test of the collectors. Rana, when he started his digital-based work, was not welcomed by private galleries (his proposal for a solo was declined by one, declaring, “these are merely photographs, who is going to buy them?” In the end, he had his solo exhibition (Identical Views, 2004) at the VM Art Gallery, Karachi.

Artists, in normal circumstances, do rely on the purchase of their work, either by an enlightened enthusiast or a distant investor. However, if one compares their creative outputs to their counterparts, like writers, singers, the possession of work varies. A collector can pick a sculpture, painting, drawing, a video installation, a photograph by paying the required sum, and may display it at his house or keep it in a store. In both cases he/ she is the sole owner of the work. Whenever he/ she fancies, they can enjoy it intimately and privately.

On the other hand, a book written by an author can be collected/ possessed by millions of people. Everyone able to afford the publisher’s price can own the original work by the writer. Spread across millions; like those enjoying the new compositions of their favourite musicians, which could be accessed – and obtained – through YouTube and Spotify. Compared to these forms of expressions, the works of visual arts are commodities, for the select, who hold on to those and can make them disappear from the public sight, experience, memory.

Perfect, because the reserve of knives and forks you bring out for exclusive guests, is not to cut meat and vegetables in the kitchen. The hammer held in the hands of an art auctioneer is not appropriate for putting nails. If a work of visual art – is a commodity, it is bound to end up in a cellar like the stock of vintage wines. But if it is more than that, then by nature it resists its caging in a posh residence. The Italian author Umberto Eco titled one of his essays Does the Audience have Bad Effect on Television? Likewise, the consumers do play a part in shaping the form/ content of art expressions. If a book of literature is read by millions, it can’t be esoteric – just recall those humble pamphlets, the stories/ scandals of immediate surroundings and recent past, offered for a meagre amount in buses and public vans not long ago. Those texts were accessible to their readers/ users, in terms of narrative structure, and vocabulary – interest too.

The work of fiction, whether sold in a moving vehicle or at a high street bookstore is for the reader to pick, enjoy and share with others who also bought the same publication. This is not the case with the collector of an artwork, who is unable to share his/ her possession except with a limited few, hence no way of dispossessing it. The condition of this restricted exchange may have determined the hermetical nature of most works created in our midst.

However, the primordial question still stands unanswered. If a collector possesses a work of art, does he/ she also have the authority on its narrative, imagery, reproduction? Or does the entire humanity, or the society, own and identify with it. Even if a work of art is in a private collection it becomes part of public discourse – much like the banana and a piece of duct tape, found in many houses – and in many arguments on art.

The writer is an art critic based in Lahore