Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The ArtReview’s Power 100: On the Concept and the Constitution of Power in Contemporary Art

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Arts and Power

Part of the book series: Kunst und Gesellschaft ((KUGE))

  • 319 Accesses

Abstract

Why is there a ranking of the most influential agents in contemporary art? This article contributes to a deeper understanding of epistemologies in art worlds and does so by focusing on paradigmatic worldviews. I reconstruct the ranking Power 100’s understanding of art’s role in society, its assumed internal mechanisms and the function of power in it. My results show how the list makes sense within its own terms, because the analysis highlights the consistency of the list’s paradigmatic assumptions about a world-to-ranked and its concrete production. Furthermore, I discuss sociological concepts of power (Weber, Bourdieu, Luhmann) to argue that the list can be described as an internal perspective on the art world rather than an external understanding of it. The Power 100’s epistemology combines a deep belief in art’s positive role in society with a proto-sociological conception of symbolic (power) structures and the autonomous reproduction of the arts. Referring to research on evaluation and comparison, my empirical and theoretical results have implications for both a sociology of the arts and research on rankings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    All Power 100 lists since 2002 and the current profiles of ranked units are online. The ArtReview was founded in 1949 and describes itself as one “of the world’s leading international contemporary art magazines” (ArtReview 2019b).

  2. 2.

    See Buckermann 2020 for such a discussion in the sociology of art’s seminal approaches ranging from interactionist (Becker 1982/2008) to field theoretical (Bourdieu 1992/1996), and systems theoretical (Luhmann 1995/2000) traditions.

References

  • Abbott, Andrew. 2014. The problem of excess. Sociological Theory 32(1): 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • ArtReview. 2014. ArtReview November 2014. Vol. 66 no. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • ArtReview. 2015. ArtReview November 2015. Vol. 67 no. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • ArtReview. 2016. ArtReview November 2016. Vo. 68 no 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • ArtReview. 2017. ArtReview November 2017. Vol. 69 no. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • ArtReview. 2019a. Power 100. The annual ranking of the most influential people in art. https://artreview.com/power-100/. Accessed: 17 October 2019.

  • ArtReview. 2019b. About. https://artreview.com/about/. Accessed: 17 October 2019.

  • Becker, Howard. 2008 [1982]. Art worlds. 25th Anniversary edition, updated and expanded. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu Pierre. 1980 [1977]. The production of belief: Contribution to an economy of symbolic goods. Media Culture Society 2: 261–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. The forms of capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, ed. John Richardson, 241–258. New York: Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1988 [1984]. The hit parade of french intellectuals, or who is to judge the legitimacy of the judges? In Homo Academicus, Pierre Bourdieu, 256–270. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1993 [1981]. But who created the ‘creators’? In Sociology in Question, Pierre Bourdieu, 139–148. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1993 [1983]: The field of cultural production, or: The economic world reversed. In The field of cultural production: Essays on art and literature. Pierre Bourdieu, 29–73. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1996 [1992]. The rules of art: Genesis and structure of the literary field. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1998 [1994]. Practical reason: On the theory of action. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandtner, Christof. 2017. Putting the world in orders. Plurality in organizational evaluation. Sociological Theory 35(3): 200–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchholz, Larissa. 2008. Feldtheorie und Globalisierung. In Nach Bourdieu. Visualität, Kunst, Politik, Eds. Beatrice von Bismarck, Therese Kaufmann, and Ulf Wuggenig, 211–238. Wien: Turia+Kant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchholz, Larissa. 2018. Rethinking the center-periphery model: Dimensions and temporalities of macro-structure in a global field of cultural production. Poetics 71: 18–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchholz, Larissa and Ulf Wuggenig. 2005. Cultural globalisation between myth and reality: The case of the contemporary visual arts, Glocalogue 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckermann, Paul. 2018. Reactions, reactivity, rampant reductions. On self-fulfilling prophecies, the Matthew effect, and global potentials of a new gallery ranking. Creative Industries Journal 11(2): 197–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckermann, Paul. 2020. Die Vermessung der Kunstwelt. Quantifizierende Beobachtungen und plurale Ordnungen der Kunst. Weilerwist: Velbrück.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckermann, Paul. 2021. Ranking Art: Paradigmatic Worldviews in the Quantification and Evaluation of Contemporary Art. Theory, Culture & Society 38(4): 89–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, Michel. 1984. Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge? The Sociological Review 32/S1, Ed. John Law, 196–233. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espeland, Wendy, and Michael Sauder. 2007. Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology 113(1): 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espeland, Wendy and Mitchell Stevens. 1998. Commensuration as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology 24: 313–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espeland, Wendy and Mitchell Stevens. 2008. A sociology of quantification. European Journal of Sociology 49(3): 401–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esposito, Elena and David Stark. 2019. What’s observed in a rating? Rankings as orientation in the face of uncertainty. Theory, Culture & Society 36(4): 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, Hans Krause and Mikkel Flyverbom. 2015. The politics of transparency and the calibration of knowledge in the digital age. Organization 22(6): 872–889.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heintz, Bettina. 2016. “Wir leben im Zeitalter der Vergleichung.” Perspektiven einer Soziologie des Vergleichs. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 45(5): 305–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heintz, Bettina and Tobias Werron. 2011. Wie ist Globalisierung möglich? Zur Entstehung globaler Vergleichshorizonte am Beispiel von Wissenschaft und Sport. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 63: 359–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judah, Hettie. 2017. What Does Hito Steyerl’s Power 100 Ranking Say About the Art World? https://news.artnet.com/art-world/hito-steyerl-power-100-1139549. Accessed: 17 October 2019.

  • Lamont, Michèle. 2012. Toward a comparative sociology of valuation and evaluation. Annual Review of Sociology 38: 201–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann. Niklas. 1969. Klassische Theorie der Macht: Kritik ihrer Prämissen. Zeitschrift für Politik 16(2): 149–1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, Niklas. 1975. Macht. Stuttgart: Enke. Englisch edition: Luhmann, Niklas. 2017. Trust and Power, Part 2. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, Niklas. 2000 [1995]. Art as a social system. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, Niklas. 2012 [1997]. Theory of Society, Vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins, Luis. 2005. A model of the effects of reputational rankings on organizational change. Organization Science 16(6): 701–720.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quemin, Alain. 2006. Globalization and mixing in the visual arts. An empirical survey of ‚high culture’ and globalization. International Sociology 21(4): 522–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quemin, Alain. 2013. Les stars de l'art contemporain. Notoriété et consécration artistiques dans les arts visuels. Paris: CNRS Éditions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quemin, Alain. 2018. The uneven distribution of international success in the visual artist among nations, according to the rankings of the top 100 artists in the world. In Art and the Challenge of Markets, Vol. 1, ed. Victoria Alexander, Samuli Hägg, Simo Häyrynen, and Erkki Sevänen, 249–275. Cham: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, Violina, Luis Martins, Santosh Srinivas, and David Chandler. 2018. The good, the bad, and the ugly of organizational rankings. A multidisciplinary review of the literature and directions for future research. Journal of Management 44(6): 2175–2208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stäheli, Urs. 2012. Listing the global: Dis/connectivity beyond representation? Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 13(3): 233–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steyerl, Hito. 2017. Duty free Art. Art in the Age of Planetary Civil War. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velthuis, Olav. 2005. Talking prices. Symbolic meanings of prices on the market for contemporary art. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1978 [1922]. Economy and Society. An Outline of Interpretative Sociology. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, Harrison and Cynthia White. 1993 [1965]. Canvases and careers: Institutional change in the French painting world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zembylas, Tasos. 2006. Modelle sozialer (Un) Ordnung. Überlegungen zur Konstitution der Forschungsgegenstände der Kulturbetriebslehre. In Kulturbetriebsforschung, eds. Tasos Zembylas and Peter Schmuck, 17–45. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany

    Paul Buckermann

Authors
  1. Paul Buckermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Buckermann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Music and Performing Art Wien – mdw, Wien, Austria

    Lisa Gaupp

  2. Leuphana University, Lüneburg, Germany

    Alenka Barber-Kersovan

  3. Leuphana University, Lüneburg, Germany

    Volker Kirchberg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Buckermann, P. (2022). The ArtReview’s Power 100: On the Concept and the Constitution of Power in Contemporary Art. In: Gaupp, L., Barber-Kersovan, A., Kirchberg, V. (eds) Arts and Power. Kunst und Gesellschaft. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-37429-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-37429-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-37428-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-37429-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation