Last news of those chairs : It´s a danish architekt named
Philip Arctanders who has designed the chairs. See the news from Bruun Rasmussen DK in the link.
Btw. 2 chairs are comming up on BR Auctions within 2 hours from now.
I´ll report the prices when sold.
olav
http://www.bruun-rasmussen.dk/vfs/news/130613-2.html?lang=en
This one at Wright (?)
in March sold for $26,000.
http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/16286656_martin-olsen-lounge-chair
both chairs sold for
DKK 275.000 ( approx. £ 30.000) see link
olav
http://www.bruun-rasmussen.dk/today-search.do?pg=1&iid=300554262&did=100...
Not Martin Olsen
Bruun Rasmussen just came up with some information that now attributes these chairs to a Dane, Phillip Arctander.
It is here in Danish: http://www.bruun-rasmussen.dk/vfs/news/archive/130610.html
SORRY. LATE TO THE PARTY 🙁
cont.
When you boil it down, does it really matter if it's by Viggo Boesen, Martin Olsen or Philip Arctander? Perhaps a bit if two are real people who were architects and/ or designers and one is likely not even a real person. But my honest opinion is that it's a delightful design, but not revolutionary or terribly important in the history of modern design. I can not account for the extremely high auction results. I do not think that the chair is as rare as, or worth as much as a Finn Juhl chieftain chair made by Niels Vodder or other truly important designs. But such are the vagaries of the auction market. When wealthy bidders pay exorbitant prices for items, it often has little to do with rational considerations and more to do with ego and desire.
I think that Bruun Rasmussen has done a commendable job of finding out the actual designer. I'm very impressed. I know very well that it's far easier for people to point fingers and criticize others, than it is to do what they do and do it better. I don't think any of the confusion about the attribution of these designs has anything to with nefarious intent on the part of sellers and speaks more to the interconnected nature of life with the internet and the speed with which information (correct or incorrect) can travel.
Not really that weird mynameismartinolsen
No dealer, no auction house, nor any collector can know every designer or manufacturer of every obscure design. There are times that an auction house makes an error, be it attribution, material, era, etc. That is to be expected. They handle and catalogue a lot of items and are run by people. People make mistakes. Most houses will acknowledge and correct an error, auctions are often preceded by announcements of corrections and any withdrawn lots. Dealers too are people, and in addition to not being able to know the designer of every object they encounter, they often rely on resources to help identify and attribute the items they are selling. Those resources are books published about broad areas of collecting, monographs on designers/ architects/ artists, auction catalogues, other dealer's listings, and direct discussions and inquires with other dealers who may specialize in a particular genre.
If an error is made as some point, it is easy to see how others might follow suit (having no real reason to question the attribution) and a misattribution can spread. For dealers to assume that an attribution made by large auction houses with full-time researchers on staff is correct is easy to understand. I don't think that it's irresponsible for dealers or collectors to not question every attribution made to every little known designer.
Prior to the past few years this "clam chair" design was essentially unknown. As BR notes, before the previous attributions of Boesen and Olsen, it was listed as anonymous and sold for very little. Is Viggo Boesen an important designer? Does the name Martin Olsen carry any cachet or add value? Why the sudden explosion in prices for these chairs?
I acquired our Clam chair here in the Mid-West United States in August 2009. I did not know who it was by when I purchased it, I simply responded to the design based on it's artistic merits. I liked it so much that I seriously considered keeping it and using it (that's a common problem when you have the collector's bug as I do). When I began researching the chair, it was some time before I discovered an auction listing attributing it to Viggo Boesen. I had no reason to question that attribution, and was surprised when I later saw it listed as Martin Olsen. I began to look into it further and discovered an essay by someone who found an example marked by VIK & BLINDHEIM and asserted that it was in fact designed by Norwegian Martin Olsen. I think that if Norwegian National Museum of Art, Architecture and Design said the chair was designed by Martin Olsen it's perfectly reasonable for dealers and auction houses to accept that attribution. It's not like someone could run a DNA test on a chair to establish it's paternity.
It's relative
I did not mean to suggest that it's not rare. Compared to a fiberglass Eames chair or a wire Bertoia chair they are as rare as hen's teeth. But in just the past couple years, how many have appeared at auction?
It could be the high prices they have brought are drawing more to the market, but compared to some other designs that are truly scarce, they are not incredibly rare.
It will be interesting to see if this new development has a lasting impact on the prices and if interest will grow or wane.
I trust that you have seen the three pieces that Wright ran a week ago: http://www.wright20.com/auctions/view_search/QHJP/QHJQ/192/LA/martin_olsen/
http://www.wright20.com/auctions/view_search/QHJP/QHJQ/193/LA/martin_olsen/
http://www.wright20.com/auctions/view_search/QHJP/QHJQ/191/LA/martin_olsen/
http://www.wright20.com/auctions/view_search/QHJP/QHJQ/192/LA/martin_olsen/
However...
We have also been closely following the market for these chairs, since we currently own a couple.
I'd add some observations: Obviously, irrespective of the chair's designer, and even to those coming across it for the first time, the odd form and comical, charming character are captivating enough. The chair works with many different decorative styles. (Check out Ilse Crawford or The Apartment in Denmark).
The exorbitant prices belong to the parallel universe that has been driving up prices across the board, especially in fine art. Whoever bought the pair in London recently probably didn't mortgage their house to do so.
My reaction to Bruun Rasmussen and Peter Kjelgaard's research was a little mixed. Firstly, it is not fully substantiated. He cites advertising from the forties and word of mouth but there is, as yet, no solid documented attribution. It'll probably come, and I don't doubt his integrity. But the game is a pretty ruthless one at times and prestige is currency in the auction world. I cannot help but feel there was a little bit of attention-getting involved in the timing, and actually a conscious attempt to dampen some of the hysteria over these chairs, which seriously threatened to almost trivialize the big names in Danish design, price-wise (Bruun Rassmussen's bread and butter). They still achieved respectable prices for this part of the world, but if I was the seller of those two particular chairs, I wouldn't think BR was doing me any favors.
Look forward to reading more thoughts. As to the rarity: It's a relative term. Seventy odd thousand pounds a piece will pull a few out of the wood-work, but there is already plenty of interest all over the world to acquire one.
Some good points Halmstad
I find this entire matter very interesting on a number of levels. Just to clarify, I'll repeat that I think the clam chair is a wonderful design. Like I said, I wanted to keep ours and live with it in my home, even before I had any idea who might have designed it. My interest in it was purely aesthetics and it's function (it's a surprisingly comfortable little chair) monetary value played no part in my attraction. I think the design has many fantastic qualities. Some of the other designs I think are rather clumsy looking and are far less successful. I think from purely an aesthetic perspective it has significant value. That is why we priced our chair the way we did rather than less expensively.
Despite it's attributes, I do not think that the chair is of the same caliber as some other comparably priced designs by top Scandinavian designers/ architects. I don't know that BR would intentionally try to de-value the design in an effort to keep it from overshadowing the pieces they are known for selling. And while I can understand someone being curious to see more concrete documentation for attribution at this point, I think they make a pretty compelling case and it's more reasoned than the previous attributions.
The most fascinating part of this to me is the "Emperor's Clothes" aspect. When an artwork or object of design is selling for very high sums, there is a subjective element, or a "perceived" value. I mean, there are lots of chairs that are perfectly nice, and serve their purpose quite well, but when someone is paying 30 or 50 thousand dollars for one, there are other factors at play. IN addition to the desire and ego factors I mentioned previously, they are often buying what they consider to be investment quality collectible furniture. They often expect that it will hold it's value and that they are paying for something that is very rare if not a unique piece and that it has importance in a historical or social context. The fact that now it has been shown that the value of something as obscure as a chair by an essentially unknown designer (as noted, some might now still be skeptical about the attribution) can be inflated to such a degree, makes the market look as irrational and flimsy as a stock market run or a housing bubble. Not usually a good thing.
I doubt very little that the folks who bought these chairs at these high prices will be loosing sleep over it all, because as Halmstad noted, these are buyers who can afford to spend that kind of money on an easy chair. It's not like spending tens of millions of dollars on a Van Gogh only to find that it's a copy, but to have something like the authorship of an object constantly shifting surely can not not give one confidence in a very high valuation. I'll be surprised if expectations are not adjusted and prices moderated.
regarding price....
i'm not totally agreeing with you on this.
Clearly it was a bubble, and 3 or 4 very rich people just flipped through the same catalog the same day and said "i want it". Ending up in off market prices.
But isn't that the case of every single artist? Isn't that how prices are settled?
The most interesting thing, in my opinion, about this one, is precisely that Martin Olsen (aka Philip Arktander) is a nobody. Litteraly. He doesn't even exist.
So all these people were not buying or attempting to buy the name of the artist, or his life story, or making an investment because they know the chairs are very rare: they were buying the design.
I must say i love this Clam design, and the more i see it, the more i think it might become a classic. Simple, fun, apparently comfortable...
My humble opinion is that a little bit of scandal and mystery will not ease the prices on these designs.
If anything, it will excite the market.
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com