A determinant of creativity: the public art acquisitions at the Spanish Basque Country in the 20th...

Castañer & Hernández: The public art acquisitions at the Spanish Basque Country in the 20th century

1

XVIIth WORLD ECONOMIC HISTORY CONGRESS

Kyoto, Japan, 3-7 August 2015

Session S20153: Determinants of creativity: The case of the arts

Title: “A determinant of creativity: the public art acquisitions at the Spanish Basque Country in the 20th century”

Authors:

-Dr. Xesqui Castañer. Tenured Lecturer of History of Art at the Universitat de València (Spain). Director of the Master’s Programme ‘History of Art and Visual Culture’. (Email: [email protected] )

-Dr. José-Luis Hernández-Marco. Tenured Lecturer of History and Economic Institutions (retired) at the Universidad del País Vasco/Eukal Herriko Unibersitatea, Vitoria-Gasteiz (Spain). (Email: [email protected] )

The Economics of Art Museum and the government support for the arts, are already two consolidated fields of Cultural Economics, starting from the pioneering works of (Blaugh, Mark, 1976) and (Netzer, 1978) and continuing with, at least, the compilations of (DiMaggio, Paul J.(ed), 1986); (Cummings, Milton C.; Katz, Richard M. (eds), 1987) (Cummings, Milton C.; Davison-Schuster, J.M.(eds), 1989); (Feldstein, Martin (ed), 1991); the number 2-3, Volume 22, of Journal of Cultural Economics (1998), especially the paper of (Johnson & Thomas, 1998) and more recently (Ginsburgh, Victor and David Throsby, eds. , 2006) and (Towse, Ruth (ed), 2011). More specifically, there is also an increasing attention to the price of artworks. Thus, we find (Reitlinger, 1961) and more theoretical works such as those from (Singer, 1978), (Owen, Virginia L.; Hendon, William S.(eds), 1985) , (Baumol, 1986), (Shaw, et al., 1987), (Hendon, William S.; Hillman-Chartrand, Harry; Horowitz, Harold (eds), 1989), (Cummings, Milton C.; Davison-Schuster, J.M.(eds), 1989), (Grampp, 1989), (Frey & Pommerehne, 1990), (Singer & Lynch, 1994) and (Throsby, 1994) or more empirical ones like those from (Gérard-Varet, Louis A. (ed), 1989), (Goetzmann, 1993) and (Barre, et al., 1994).

As Zimmer and Toepler (1999) point out, Netzer’s groundbreaking work discusses the public support for art, wondering about ‘what’ and ‘why’ was that support as well as analyses its effects and ‘what difference does it make’, and particularly focusing his paper on ‘why’. The market failure arguments have dominated the debate


2

in Cultural Economics, as well as the Welfare State policies and its issues of equality and democratization of the arts. These justifications predominate in the works of (Lord, et al., 1989) for Great Britain, as well as (Banfield, 1984), (Cummings, Milton C.; Katz, Richard M. (eds), 1987), (Frey, 1994) and (Pommerhne & Feld, 1997). The same also applies to the local government support for the arts, as analysed in the case of Sweden by (Khakee, 1988).

We arrived ourselves to similar appreciations on public creation and support to Basque museums since the late nineteenth century and during the twentieth century, which derived from Biscayan and Gipuzkoan industrialization in the last third of the nineteenth century, with the subsequent development of the bourgeoisie at Bilbao and Donostia-San Sebastián, and the latest and in Franco period, modernization of Vitoria. (Castañer López & Hernández Marco, 2014).

Now, we will try to analyse one of the potential effects of that public support, after briefly approaching the first Netzer’s ‘what’. In other words, we are trying to answer the question: Can be an effect of The Subsidized Muse to become a determinant for creativity? Or, transposing the question to our case study, could the public acquisitions of artworks from the four museums of the Basque Country throughout the twentieth century be determinant for creativity (and production) to contemporary Basque painters and sculptors?

To that end, this work is structured as follows: in section 1 we try to answer how and when the first museum’s collections are created, thanks to the potentialities offered by the peculiar Basque tax system in the Spanish context. In section 2, we describe, exclusively from a statistical and financial point of view, the acquisition volume and chronology of Basque artworks, namely, belonging to artists that were born in the Basque Country or that, because they worked mainly in the Basque Country, History of Art bibliography considers them Basque artits. In section 3 we analyse who are these artists, focusing on those whose artworks were acquired repeatedly in time and ended up with more than five pieces in public collections. That is to say, the artists that have more possibilities to verify the role of acquisitions as a subsidy for their creation. These artists will be classified using three explanatory models of the possible consequences of public subsidies. Finally, in the last section, we will determine the conclusions.

1. The dynamics of formation of public collection in the Basque Country

The birth of Spanish public museums is usually located in 1819, the year of opening of the Royal Museum of Paintings and Sculptures to the general public in the present building of the Museo del Prado in Madrid. Ferdinand VII created the museum with a collection of more than 1,800 pieces from the Royal Sites, from which 310 were exhibited. As collateral effects of the sale of the Church lands and the first rules on the protection of national heritage in 1836/37, the so-called Museo de la Trinidad is also founded in Madrid in 1838, formed by 554 paintings and many other objects from


3

suppressed convents in the provinces of Madrid, Ávila, Burgos, Segovia and Toledo, plus the seized property of Prince Sebastian of Bourbon and Braganza. The rather eventful life of this museum, subjected to the vagaries of political circumstances, will end up with its suppression and integration of its collection into the by now Museo Nacional del Prado in 1870 and 1872. The initial process of formation of the Museo de la Trinidad’s collection started in other Spanish cities with some modifications and with the bourgeois principle of considering national the confiscated ecclesiastical heritage as well as the Crown’s. An effort was made to extend the process outside Madrid with the Royal Order passed on 13th June, 1844, that enabled the birth of many Provincial and/or Municipal Museums, also with the initial collections originated from the suppressed convents of the respective provinces (Antigüedad del Castillo-Olivares, 1998). This origin derived from Church’s confiscations and bourgeoisie is traceable as well within the precedents of Basque museums.

Nevertheless, in respect of the rest of Spanish provincial and local administrations and the potential museum institutions dependent upon them, Basque (and also Navarrese) administrations have an important feature: forality and the corollary of Economic Agreement (‘Concierto Económico’); i.e., from one hand, the allocation of increased budgetary resources, since taxes are collected and a Quota to be paid to the Government is ‘deducted’, with a prior bilateral negotiation. From the other hand, the power to manage the rest of issues according to their own economic, social and cultural policies (Alonso Olea, 1995) and (Vicario y Peña, Nicolás; Alonso Olea, Eduardo, 1997). In addition, the very different Spanish political junctures during the twentieth century, affected unevenly the three provinces, by losing the ‘traitors’ Gipuzkoa and Biscay their capacities of forality during the Franco years, while the ‘loyal’ Alava (and Navarra) will keep them throughout the entire twentieth century without interruption. (Badía Lacalle, Jacinto (Comp.), 1975)

In the three Basque provincial capitals, with the exception of Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, created in 1997 and, therefore, falls outside of our analysis, there are four museums sustained by public funds: the Bilbao Fine Arts Museum; the San Telmo Museum at San Sebastian; the Álava Fine Arts Museum and the Artium, both at Vitoria-Gasteiz.

In Bilbao there is a precedent in the line previously mentioned: the establishment of the Museo de Pinturas de Vizcaya in 1842 housed in a property leased by the Provincial Council in 1845 and which reached up to 30 paintings.

However, there seems to be a consensus that the promise made by the mining engineer Mr. Laureano de Jado of donating his collection ‘to Museo de Bilbao’, if it was created, or of making his donation to a different institution outside Biscay, can be read as the real thrust that resulted in its concreteness, in truth, in the conducive atmosphere of the bourgeoisie from Bilbao and its political representatives. In such a way, the Museo de Bellas Artes de Bilbao was officially founded on 5th October 1908, when the Biscay Provincial Council and Bilbao City Council created the Museum Board of


4

Trustees. It was initially established –sharing the use– at a Neoclassic building of the former Civil Hospital of Achuri that since 1882 was headquarters of the School of Arts and Crafts and also later, the Secondary School. The Museum was assigned a glazed yard that allowed to set up three rooms. The artworks belonging to the Provincial Council were relocated to be exhibited –from the Casa de Misericordia and Casa de Expósitos–; a few from the early Museo de Vizcaya; from the City Council, from the Consulate and the Casa de Contratación; from the School of Arts and Crafts; from the Casa de Juntas de Guernica; together with some pieces donated by the aforementioned Jado, Antonio Plasencia and the first Director, the painter Juan Losada. Therefore, from the beginning, there was collectionism and artistic tastes both public and private. From those holdings and in that location it was inaugurated on 8th February 1914.

The success of a cultural initiative by the Biscay Provincial Council, the ‘International Painting and Modern Sculpture Exhibition’ in 1919, in which the Council contributed to the organization expenditures and consign ‘40,000 pesetas’- nearly 56,000 actual €- for acquiring some of the exhibited artworks, from which 20% belonged to artists born in the Basque Country and Navarre, enhanced the public institutional role, representing the mining and commercial bourgeoisie of Biscay, in the promotion and dissemination of Modern Art. In 1922, and in view of the space limitations at the Museo de Bellas Artes, the Provincial Council created the Museo de Arte Moderno, which was opened in 1924, installed on the second floor of a Council`s building, which also hosted the Provincial Press and the Music Conservatory. Artworks of Basque living painters were transferred from the Museo de Bellas Artes and others acquired at the International Exhibition of 1919. Thus, both museums coexisted until the Spanish Civil War, when the storage of the collection from the Museo de Bellas Artes and the expatriation of pieces from the Museo de Pintura Moderna, were both were almost entirely reunited and the items were only allowed to remain stored at the Depósito Franco de Uribitarte, at the harbour, since the original building was dedicated to war effort. Therefore, on 3th February 1939, the Provincial Council and the City Council –both already wholeheartedly Francoist– agreed on financing the construction of a building for the Museo de Bellas Artes, on a land provided by the City Council at the Parque de Dª Casilda, which was then called ‘de las Tres Naciones’. The final Museo –which suffered two important enlargements in 1963 and 1984-86– was inaugurated on 17th June 1945 by merging the boards of trustees and collections of the two previous museums. (Luna, 1989) and (Zugaza Miranda, 1999).

The case of the Museo Municipal de San Telmo, at Donostia-San Sebastián, is rather more local than provincial. Quite possibly, its municipal status is linked to the growth of the city itself, to the nature of the industrialization at Gipuzkoa and to the strong, and rather homogeneous, demographic increase of other urban-industrial centers in the province. But, since the Restoration (1874 onwards), San Sebastian takes shape as a first-rate touristic city and will need commercial and cultural infrastructures to consolidate such function. (Castells, 1987) Thus, as an initiative from the Sociedad Económica Bascongada de Amigos del País, the City Council approved the creation of


5

the Museo Histórico, Artístico y Arqueológico. With a small collection, mainly derived from donations, it was inaugurated on 5th October 1902 at a municipal building, and sharing half of the ground floor with the Free Secondary School. In 1905, the City Council began the construction of a building, at Urdaneta Street, to host the shared premises of the School of Arts and Crafts, the Municipal Library and the museum itself, which will remain from 1911, the year of inauguration, until 1932. In that year it was transferred, together with the Municipal Library, with which coexisted until 1951, to a former Dominican convent, acquired and renovated by the City Council in 1928, taking the popular name of the old convent. In the same building had the seat until 1994 the initial sponsor of the museum project in 1900, the Sociedad Bascongada de Amigos del País, as well as many and varied cultural associations. (Nicolau & Zulaika, 2005)

As we have just shown, the origin and the first steps of the museums of Bilbao and San Sebastian is adjusted to the industrialization of Biscay and Gipuzkoa and to the strengthening of their respective industrial and commercial bourgeoisie at their provincial capitals, with the additional circumstance, in the case of San Sebastián, of its role of touristic and leisure centre for the political-social elites from other Spanish regions, particularly Madrid.

It is therefore hardly surprising the backwardness of the rural Alava and its ‘Levitical’ capital, Vitoria (Rivera Blanco, 1992), as well as the cultural and museum manifestations conducted by the political representatives of the industrial and commercial bourgeoisie, much more powerful at their neighbouring provinces. Although at Vitoria in the middle of the 19th century, as we saw at Bilbao, a public collection (1844) and a museum with some works derived from the ecclesiastical confiscations was formed (1866), but only lasted one year the first and failed to be created the last, unlike its sister capitals. Its continuity will be delayed only after the Civil War, when an accelerating industrialization in Alava would take place, developmentalism before Franco’s Developmentalism, as it was recently defined such process. (García Zúñiga, 2009)

Notwithstanding, there are some emerging initiatives that will make possible the future existence, albeit with delay, of that cultural infrastructure. In 1827 drawing classes were resumed at the Academy of Arts, created at the end of the eighteenth century, at the initiative of the Real Sociedad Bascongada de Amigos del País. To this end, Vitoria Council approves a financial contribution of 5.000 reales a year and the acquisition of lands at Alto del Campillo, known as ‘El Parral’. In 1891, given the lack of space, a two-storey building is erected that is called Academia de Bellas Artes. In 1923, the current building of the School of Arts and Crafts is constructed. As a consequence of this centres of artistic education, some exhibitions are held. Therefore, in 1916 the Real Ateneo de Vitoria organizes an exhibition with the participation of 17 painters and drawers. In 1934, the Paraninfo Hall of the School of Arts and Crafts, hosts an exhibition that pays tribute to the local painter Ignacio Díaz de Olano, with 71 canvas created by the artist and his disciples. Two years later, in 1936, in the same framework, the Painting Exhibition of Artists from Alava is organized. It was possibly


6

the most important painting exhibition from Alava of this century, with the inclusion of 19 painters with 100 pieces. But it was only in 1941, that the Provincial Council decides to buy the Augusti Palace –a private hotel erected in 1912 by Ricardo Augusti, Count of Dávila and property developer–, in order to host, tentatively, the collections of the Museo de Arte and Arqueología, the Archive and the Provincial Libraries, as well as the collections of the School of Arts and Crafts and of the Secondary School. Since 1966, several collections are individualized. A Museo de Arte Vasco is installed at the acquired Palace of Ajuria-Enea, in front of the former, until a future cession as seat of the Basque Government; the creation of the Museo de Arqueología -in an independent building- originated the individualization of the Museo de Bellas Artes de Álava at the Agusti Palace, from which afterwards, with its inauguration in 2002, the more contemporary part of the collection was segregated to create the Artium. (Begoña, et al., 1982) and (González de Aspuru & Sancristóval, 2001)

2. Purchase of artworks as a form of growing the public collections in the Basque Country

As it has been thoroughly discussed in (Castañer López & Hernández Marco, 2014), the four Basque museums had, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, 4,862 pieces (not including decorative and graphic arts), from which 1,737 were directly acquired in the twentieth century. Due to the size of the collection, with 1,993 pieces, the museum of Bilbao is the larger, being the donations, with over a thousand pieces, the main source for incorporation of items, although the almost 700 items acquired in the last century (36%) is not a negligible figure. The museums of Alava, given the fact that Artium was recently created –although the bulk of its collection was previously gathered– reach, jointly, the second position with 1,593 items, being the direct purchase –almost 900 items– the main form of income (56%). All in all, the municipal museum of Gipuzkoa is slightly smaller, with 1,356 pieces, as well as being by far the one with less purchases, since the direct acquisitions in the twentieth century were 152, a little above the 11% of the collection. In order to widen the statistical basis of purchased items, we have included around a thousand items acquired directly by the Provincial Councils of Biscay and Gipuzkoa, which for the most part are exhibited or deposited in their respective museums. Therefore, our analysis, as shown in Table 1, refers to 2,733 items purchased, from which 51% belong to Basque artists. Province by province, Gipuzkoa, the least purchaser, is the one that acquires more indigenous artworks (78%). The museum that purchases the most, Biscay, acquires almost half Basque artworks (48%) and 52% foreign artworks. For the museums of Alava that, let us recall, are mainly purchasers when forming their collections, the relative weight of Basque pieces is even a bit lower (45%).

If we convert, in order to chronologically homogenize calculations, current pesetas into constant pesetas of 1995 value (Prados de la Escosura, 2003) transformed in Euros– Pesetas 8,256 million or €49,6 million– significant subtleties arise in some


7

historical periods, although, on the total, percentages are similar. Moreover, if we put in perspective the amount of acquisitions taking into account the very unequal demographic weight of the provinces, Alava –with 49,58€/inhabitant– lies slightly above Biscay –47,79 €/inhab.–, and both increase ten times the expenditure per inhabitant in Gipuzkoa (4,12€). Hence, regarding the relative public investment effort in works of Art, Alava, the smallest, stands out in the secular total, with a greater effort during developmentalism and the beginning of the Transition, closely followed by the bigger one, Biscay, especially due to the purchase volume per inhabitant during the toughest Franco period, the so-called age of Autarchy and the Hinge Decade (1939-1959).

The maintenance throughout the entire twentieth century of the Economic Agreement in Alava and in the second half of the century –coinciding with the industrial take-off in Vitoria–the focus on the formation of the collection seems decisive. By contrast, during the period 1900-1936, with equivalent Agreements in the three provinces, Gipuzkoa stands out in its spending capacity per inhabitant with a 60% more than Biscay and with a 29% more than Alava. Thus, the touristic role of San Sebastian becomes evident. Regarding Art purchases, nevertheless, the effort of Biscay and its Museo de Bellas Artes is almost six times the one at San Telmo in Donostia. As explained above, Alava did not have its Museo de Bellas Artes in that period.

In the subsequent periods (Franco years and beginning of Democratic Transition) between 1937 and 1978, only the ‘loyal’ Alava maintains its Agreement while the two ‘traitors’ provinces, loose it. For this reason, the spending capacity in Alava is, at the beginning of Franco’s era, nothing less than a 50% higher than Gipuzkoa’s and 2.6 times higher than Biscay’s. However, while the initial formation of the Museo de Bellas Artes de Vitoria involves a procurement expenditure per inhabitants of 1,180 pesetas (7.14€), the effort of Biscay in the midst of Franco’s Autarchy is, in constant pesetas of 1995 value, four times higher. During developmentalism and at the end of Franco, on the contrary, coinciding with the intense industrialization in Alava, the total spending capacity is 7 and 6 times higher than Gipuzkoa’s and Biscay’s. At the same time, the intense shaping of its collection means that, in art purchases per inhabitant, the 4,736 pesetas of 1995 value (28.46€) are 14 times more than Biscay’s and 800 times more than Gipuzkoa’s.

Let us pause to consider the potential meaning of the given the particularities of Alava and Biscay.

As we have just pointed out, the 76% of artwork procurement expenditure in Alava occurs between 1960 and 1978, although the number of items ‘only’ represents the 40% of the collection. The price paid for the artworks acquired during the years of ‘Franco’s developmentalism’ and the Transition, also clearly reflects, from an economic-financial point of view, what we had already analysed when describing the artistic specifications of Alava’s collection. We could say that the success of cultural managers was possible because they had very sizeable economical resources. In the same way, the recent


8

economic history claims the importance of the total resources of the Provincial Treasury as one of the main causes for the conversion from a rural and backward Alava, or from a ‘disenchanted’ Vitoria, into the a heavily industrialized province (García Zúñiga, 2009), or into a medium-sized dynamic city that it is today (Hernández Marco, 2002) and (Hernández Marco, 2008). The advantage of steadily having during Franco’s era the benefits of the Economic Agreement arises with crystalline clarity, for industrialization –and for strong economic growth– as much as for the formation of an important museum asset in Alava. In this respect, the case of museums in Vitoria and the growth in investment in art in a province experiencing a strong economic development, which started off with a clear degree of backwardness in relation with its Basque sisters, with the slight difference of the Agreement, seems to confirm the increase in public expenditure in museums and culture, which has been statistically evidenced in other European countries. (Geztner, 2002)

Biscay, as Gipuzkoa, among the most industrialized Spanish provinces in the first third of the twentieth century, concentrates 91% of art procurement expenditure between 1900 and 1936, but also, more remarkably, 93% in the earlier years of Franco. Once more, there is a correlation between GDP and cultural expenditure. Its more than 2,100 million pesetas of 1995 value (€12 million), in the midst of autarchy and having lost its fiscal forality, only exceeded with over 3,000 million (€18.3 million) of the democratic period, with a new Economic Agreement. Without a doubt, such a massive spending for the time, in 1940 of almost 13 million pesetas (equivalent to nearly €18 million of 1995 value) explains it almost entirely. Among the purchases, Gossaert’s “Sagrada Familia”, deserves a special mention. It was acquired to the convent Carmelitas of Cuerva (Toledo) for 9 million pesetas, that in 1995 value is the impressive amount of €7.5 million, the 21% of the total spent in art purchases in Biscay throughout the twentieth century. Apart from this significant exception, when converting its spending capacity to the equivalent in the rest of the Spanish provinces during Franco’s era, means that Biscay only represents the 23% of the Basque total expenditure between 1960 and 1978 and, for Gipuzkoa, a negligible 0.3%. Therefore, and as both provinces remain among the most developed in Spain in this period, it needs to be concluded that, for both provinces, the loss of the fiscal benefits of the Economic Agreement is an exogenous factor that conspicuously explains the causes of this abnormality regarding the museum sphere.

The re-equalization of the three Basque provinces in terms of spending capacity derived from the benefits of the Agreement, after 1979, implies the normalization of that abnormality with the unanimous splendour of the expenditure available (multiplied by 4 in Alava and by more than 20 in the other two provinces). In art purchases/inhabitant, only Gipuzkoa multiplies by 8 its purchases during Franco’s era, with differentials narrowing in this regard compared with the other two territories, although it will remain only the 25% of the procurement expenditure per inhabitant of the other two. Biscay and Alava, for the respective reasons aforementioned, reduce in 1.6 and 2.5 times respectively their purchases per inhabitant in respect with the two


9

preceding periods, although they purchase a much larger number of artworks, and in the case of Biscay, the full amount, 3,172 million pesetas (€19 million), is almost 50% higher than the one during the early Franco period and implies more than half of the total expenditure in the twentieth century.

With certain nuances, the exclusive purchase to Basque artists, as shown in Figures 3, 4 and 5, follow the same guidelines, with their respective differences by province and in chronology.

As previously discussed, from the total of t 2,733 paintings and sculptures, we know the acquisition cost of 2,322 (85%), whose authors in the latter group are distributed exactly by 50% between the ones that were born or worked in the Basque Country and those foreigners from the rest of Spain or the world, with 1,165 artworks each. In current pesetas of each year value, more than 1,740 million pesetas went towards Basque artists, the 47% of the almost 3,700 million that Basque institutions devoted to art purchases. Figures 1 and 2 graphically display the number of artworks that Basque artists had purchased by the different institutions and their cost in current pesetas.

But, once more, the conversion to constant € in 1995 value clarifies all the above, (Table 3). While the number of indigenous and foreign artworks is identical, 1,165 from a total of €49.6 million that cost the total of 2,322 artworks, the Basque pieces only cost €15.9 million, only the 32%. Biscay paid the 57.5% of the total for 549 Basque pieces (47%); Alava, the 33.5% for the 39% of the pieces; and Gipuzkoa, only the 9% of the total for the 13% of the total Basque artworks. Thus, Biscay, apart from being the largest buyer of Basque artworks, is also the province that paid more for them, followed by the small Alava and, far behind, Gipuzkoa.

Likewise, in the purchase of Basque artist’s work, the already observed chronological differences are even more exacerbated. No less than 76% of Basque art purchases are concentrated after 1978, in the current constitutional and democratic period, particularly in Gipuzkoa (95%) and Biscay (93%). The maintenance of the forality in Alava during Franco’s era results, nevertheless, in the fact that here most of the purchases of the Basque artists had take place between 1943 and 1978, the 54%. When the two ‘traitors’ provinces had museums and their autonomous Treasury before Franco years, the interest in purchasing Basque art was, nevertheless, very limited: only a 5.4% of the amount spent during the entire twentieth century in Gipuzkoa and a paltry 2.63% in Biscay. Definitely, with the significant nuance of Alava, the promotion of indigenous artists through purchases by the Basque institutions is an almost exclusive feature of the late and current democratic period, since the last quarter of the twentieth century.

3. Basque artists public subsidy through artwork purchases


10

Evidently, any public procurement of an artist piece involves subsidizing his or her work, either directly, if the purchase occurs with living artists, or indirectly, by purchasing the items to the artist’s heirs or to the original, private acquirers. In addition, the recognition, the ‘visibility’ – in the sense of the Sociology of Art (Moulain, et al., 1984) -, that implies the incorporation of an artist’s work to permanent collections of public museums must have a very positive promotional effect for the rest of the artwork subsequently acquired by private collectors (Pommerhne & Feld, 1997), and probably we are expecting similar conclusions here, from the following paper of Christiane Hellmanzik .

The scale of public subsidy achieved by an artist shall be related to the total number of his or her artworks acquired with public funds and to the total amount received. The 1,395 pieces of Basque artists acquired with public funds in the Basque Country, including those whose cost and/or date of acquisition is unknown, were produced by 422 different artists, frequentially distributed in the way summarized in Table 3 and displayed in Figures 6 and 7. Almost three-quarters of these artists, by volume, received directly or indirectly a very limited subsidy. 186 of these artists (44% of the total), had only a single art piece purchased, therefore, we may regard as testimonial the subsidy received, almost equal to the other 119 (28%) that has only up to three artworks in Basque Museums. In particular, the two groups only, 305 artists (72%) contribute with 33.4% of the total Basque artworks. It is from the third group taken into account, with 4-6 pieces, that the subsidy involved in a public purchase is much higher and concentrates the largest total number of artworks acquired.

The subsidized Muse becomes even more evident in artists that were purchased more than five pieces, particularly in the case of living artists. The latter group is reflected in tables 4 and 5. In the first one, Top Basque artists have 10 or more artworks acquired with public funds, from which 33 contribute altogether with 460 pieces, one-third of the total. They were devoted €8 million of constant 1995 value (50.5% of the total). If we ordered the list by total cost, on the first three positions would be Juan de Echeverría (€1.4 million), Aurelio Arteta (€1.2 million) and Ignacio Díaz de Olano (€0.88 million). If we were to take into account the average of the acquisition cost, the ranking would be composed by Arteta (€58,173/piece), Juan de Echeverría (€52,765/piece) and Darío de Regoyos (€52,762/piece). These four artists, considering their age and the time of the creation of the first museums, would be rarely subsidized while alive. But their almost immediate followers were indeed subsidized, the Basque sculptors, three internationally renowned stars, Eduardo Chillida (€0.72 million and €47,999 /piece), Néstor Bestarretxea (€0.36 million and €40,512/piece) and Jorge Oteiza (€0.32 million and 20,070 €/piece), from whom also, in the case of the first two, were purchased or commissioned great artworks and/or urbanistic projects by other public Basque institutions (Parliament, Councils, University, etc.).

Yet the artists in table 5, the middle-class, have relatively more subsidies, due to the predominance of younger artists, most of them in full artistic activity. The other three artists are in similar conditions to the latter sculptors quoted, all of them fully


11

subsidized, in the first three positions in terms of the total subsidized and average price of the artworks: Agustín Ibarrola (€0.41 million and €50,872 /piece), Vicente Larrea (€0.37 million and €52,531/piece) and Remigio Mendiburu (€0.27 million and €45,389/piece).

As table 4 and 5 are configured and with the artists organized by year of the first purchase, we can distinguish three different explanatory models of the possible consequences of public acquisitions. In the first one, we find artists that are born towards the middle of the nineteenth century, whose work temporally takes place, if any, during the initial formation of Bilbao and San Sebastian collections. In the second, artists that are born in the last third of the nineteenth century and, therefore, they benefit from the collections already formed and in the consolidation process of all the Museums. In the third one, the artists that are born in the mid-twentieth century, with collections already structured, whose work together with other artist’s becomes an almost permanent update of the collections.

Table 4 refers to purchase from the most representative artists on the Basque scene in the nineteenth and twentieth century that have 10 or more pieces in institutional collections, while in table 5 we find what we call the ‘middle-class’ Basque artists, that have between 6 and 9 pieces acquired by Basque institutions.

a. Model I: the 12 Basque artists that were born in the nineteenth century that were already consolidated in the initial formation period of the collections.

In the first model of the initial formation of collections, 10 artists from table 4 and 2 artists from table 5 are integrated. In table 4, we find artists such as José Echenagusia Errazquin (Echena), a representative of the academic painting in the framework of Romanticism and one of the first Basque artists with a relevant presence on the international scene. His work becomes part of institutional collections after his death in 1912, increases between the 70’s and 90’s, and ends in 2002. Aurelio Arteta is one of the modernisers of the Basque “Costumbrista” painting. One of the most purchased, with 21 artworks, the first acquisitions being in 1913-1915-1936 and 1940; the latter, just before his exile in Mexico. Acquisitions continue between 1940 -1980 and in the first decade of the twenty-first century by private collectors from Biscay, many of which are descendants of the original buyers. Juan Echevarría y Zuricalay had two artworks purchased by the Biscay Provincial Council in 1919 and 1924, later donated to the Museo de Bellas Artes de Bilbao. The Museum itself acquires one piece the year of his death, in 1931, and up until the 70’s does not purchase any of his works, dealing, in this case, with his heirs. Darío de Regoyos Valdés had one of his pieces purchased by the Museo San Telmo in San Sebastian in 1903 and the artist himself made three donations to the institution in 1903-1905. In this case, the Basque institutions continue very often to acquire some of his artworks after his death in 1913 up until 2000, except during the Civil War. Acquisitions of Ignacio Díaz de Olano’s artwork occurred long after his death, more specifically after 1951, being the 80’s and


12

90’s the period with more purchases. When alive he had only one artwork purchased by the Alava Provincial Council entitled ‘La República’, which was hidden during Franco period and was incorporated in the Museo de Bellas Artes during democracy. Quite possibly, this artist did not need institutional subsidy since his work was and is present in numerous private collections. The same thing happens to Anselmo Guinea, whose work is acquired between 1900-2000, to Francisco Iturrino, whose acquisitions occurs in the 20’s-60’s and the 90’s, or to Juan de Barroeta, in the 30’s and 90’s. This is not the case of Pablo Uranga y Díaz de Arcaya, who had pieces purchased by the Gipuzkoa Provincial Council and the Museo San Telmo in 1916, 1920 and 1922, when he is still producing. And this, without a doubt, triggers new acquisitions in the 60’s-70’s-90’s and 2000, precisely in order to complete his presence in the various collections. The same occurs with Rogelio Gordon García-Robles, who a year before his death makes a significant donation to the Museo San Telmo, which also purchases two pieces.

The artist od this first group in table 5 are: Alejandrino Irureta, who had several pieces purchased by Museo San Telmo after his death, specifically in 1912-1913, but until the 80’s and 90’s will not buy any more pieces. This is also the case of Antonio M. Lecuona y Echaniz, whose acquisitions are concentrated in the 30’s, 80’s and 90’s.

The artists in Model I had an indirect promotion, since most of them became part of the collections once they had achieved a certain degree of recognition, turning, to some extent, institutional subsidy to their heir or to their private original buyers in order to complete or enhance public collections. All of them address folkloric (Costumbrista) or landscape genres and, during the 80’s and 90’s, their presence in the institutions increases, since an important core of indigenous artists arises. Their inclusion in the collections gave recognition to the existence of an art by Basque Artists with repercussions beyond the local sphere, which will be the enhancing core for the promotion of other indigenous authors, directly subsidized up to the present day.

b. Model II: the 10 Basque artists that were born in the late nineteenth century with purchases at the beginning of their career consolidation

In this second group we find the artists whose work becomes part of institutional collections in the heat of their career consolidation. Therefore, the acquisitions imply both subsidy and promotion for further purchases. There are 6 from table 4 and 4 from table 5. With more than 10 pieces, we find Alberto Arrúe. The first acquisitions by Biscayan institutions occur during the 30’s, which means the enhancement of value at his work in his thirties. There are no further purchases until 1990, precisely when museums are reorganizing and completing their Basque art collections. The same happens with Gustavo de Maeztu y Whitney, who had his work purchased directly by the institutions at the end of the twentieth century and not again until the 90’s and at the beginning of the twenty-first century. The same situation applies to artists such as Manuel Losada Pérez de Nenin, who had artworks purchased by the institutions while


13

alive, at the end of the 20’s and beginning of the 30’s, but most of his work was acquired in 1990; Julián de Tellaeche Aldasoro, who also receives subsidy while alive, although in this case, instead of the 90’s it is 80’s when the purchases take place; Ángel Larroque and Ascensio Martiarena, are in the same situation as the above artists, that is, with purchases in the first two decades of the twentieth century, when they are securing their careers and no more purchases occur until the 80’s and 90’s, precisely when the institutional collections are being completed. In this group there are also artists from table 5, such as Benito Barrueta, who had work purchased by the institutions during various periods of his life, specifically in 1918-46-50, or Jenaro Urrutia, who also received subsidy while alive through acquisitions in 1935 and 1951. In both cases, no artwork is acquire until the 90’s and 2001. Within this group, the only artists that had no purchase until the 20’s and 30’s, right after their emergence, are Ángel Cabanas Oteiza, to be precise until 1985, and in the same line in the 90’s and 2000, and Enrique Nieto Ullíbarri, whose acquisitions are concentrated during the 90’s and 2000.

The artist in this Model II, are renovators of Basque painting, who, without leaving aside Costumbrista and plainarist topics, adopt the European trends of the moment, synthesizing forms but without incorporating the audacious features of the Avant-garde, keeping a moderate tone they always had demonstrated. Consequently, only two of these artists such as Tellaeche or Urrutia participated in the Avant-garde Exhibition Los Ibéricos in the 20’s.

c. Model III: The subsidized Basque Muse. The 34 Basque artists that were born in the middle of the twentieth century and their incorporation to the fully structured museum collections.

In the third Model, the largest, there are 16 artists from table 4 and 18 from table 5. The group is made up of artists that were born in the twentieth century, that develop their activity in the second half of the twentieth century and in the present. Some are personalities that become a reference and others join the ranks of the Avant-garde in the Basque Country. Their work feeds off the museums throughout this time and as a consequence they receive institutional subsidy through purchases that finance their activity which, at the same time, contributes to their visibility at local, national and international. The acquisitions reflect very evidently the artistic scene at different times.

We can distinguish in this group artists that were born on the first third of the twentieth century, with more than 10 pieces in the institutional collections (table 4), most of them purchased while they were alive, which makes an important institutional subsidy for their authors. In this situation, we find Juan de Aranoa, who was present in the institutions through purchases, from 1925 to 1954, and completed after his death during 90’s and 2000. José María Ucelay’s is a peculiar case, because he combines both artistic and political activity, even becoming Director General of Fine Arts with the republican Basque Government. He is one of the Basque representatives in the Exhibition Los Ibéricos. His work enters the institutions in the 50’s, continues in the


14

70’s and after his death in the 80’s-90’s-2000. Gonzalo Chillida Juantegui, Rafael Ruiz Baledi and José Díaz Fernández, have presence in almost all the institutions subject of study and all the purchases occur while alive, therefore, they have permanent subsidy for their work. The three of them represent certain changes in Basque painting. Gonzalo Chillida uses photography as a reference for his landscapes, Ruiz Balerdi opts for abstraction and Díaz Fernández, for a certain refinement of the anecdotal. In this group, we also find two painters that are still alive, Ignacio García Erguin and José Luis Zumeta, both quite significant in the Basque context. The first one, because he renews landscape and the second, because he has a preference for abstraction. Also, in both cases, most of their work was acquired in the 90’s, when collections are being completed, as mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs and, there is something very important in the case of Zumeta, his membership in the group Gaur (Today), created in 1965 and formed by Jorge Oteiza, Eduardo Chillida, Rafael Ruiz Balerdi, Remigio Mendiburu, Sistiaga, Amable Arias and Néstor Basterretxea, all of them included in this model.

The three Basque sculptors, indisputable benchmarks since the second half of the twentieth century, Nestor Basterretxea, Eduardo Chillida and Jorge Oteiza, have an important amount of artworks in the institutional collections, all of the purchased while alive and that, considering the average cost, they were strongly subsidized at the height of their respective careers, increasing not only the prestige of institutional collections, but also their projection within and outside our borders. Notwithstanding, it should also be emphasized that the beginning of the purchases occurred after the consolidation of their respective careers. In the case of Basterretxea, active militant and politician of the PNV (Basque Nationalist Party), he exiles in Argentina and returns at the beginning of the 50’s, but it is not until the 70’s that the first acquisitions take place, concentrated as of 1975, after the Dictator’s death and with the PNV as the major political force. He had also purchased other large installations with public funds, such as the great wooden sculpture that heads the chamber of the Basque Parliament. Oteiza’s case is similar, but his militancy in the left wing had him residing in Latin America, where he was highly appreciated. This is one of the reasons why until the 80’s he did not have his first works purchased by the Basque institutions, this time due to his important experimentation by restoring the European geometric aesthetic and to his influence in Basque culture. Eduardo Chillida is a case apart. With an early international projection, he concentrated a part of his large-scale work in public spaces and this makes the institutions to start purchasing his work suitable for museums later, in the 80’s, but these or other public institutions had already subsidized him with purchases for different spaces such as the Plaza de los Fueros in Vitoria, El peine de los vientos in San Sebastian, or the sculpture derived from the official logo of the Universidad del País Vasco/E.H.U.

In this group, there are some artists that were also born in the first third of the twentieth century that only have between 6 and 9 artworks in the institutional collections (table 5). Nicolás Lekuona, is one of the first representatives of the Basque


15

Avant-garde. He died at a very early age during the Civil War and his work remained in a certain ostracism until the end of the 70’s. From that moment on, different exhibitions vindicated his work and the institutions acquired it. Gaspar Montes Iturrioz receives institutional subsidy over his entire life, since with only 30 years old he had one of his artworks purchased, and many others later on in the 50’s-80’s and after his death in 2001. The purchases to Jesús Olasagasti, Arturo Acebal Idígoras or Enrique Suárez Alba follow a similar path. The first purchases occur when they begin to have a certain reputation and afterwards, in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s, being the latter period quite common in almost all the artists, since this is a period in which collections are reorganized and completed, and it corresponds to the undoubted comparative advantage of the Economic Agreement after the oil economic crisis and the industrial restructuring. Ángel Moraza Ruiz finds himself in the same situation. His work becomes part of the institutions a year before his death and many years later. All these artists are representative of figurative painting but sometimes with a conceptual-formal nature, and others making use of colour. There is another group of artists that are almost exclusively dedicated to abstraction. Among them, we find painters such as Amable Arias, whose first acquisitions date back to the 60’s and do not again until the 80’s and 90’s, having the defunct Galeria 16 in San Sebastian the exclusive rights, occasionally acting as intermediary of the artist’s family. Agustín Ibarrola is a different case, since he interchangeably practices both painting and sculpture. But the institutional collections hold mostly paintings acquired in the 70’s-80’s and 90’s, coinciding with the dates of creation, which confirms his total adequacy to the concept of subsidized muse. Regarding sculpture, there is only one purchase by a museum, since a great part of his sculptural work is located in public spaces, as in the case of the aforementioned sculptors.

It is precisely regarding sculptures that the subsidy is much higher, as can be seen from Remigio Mendiburu’s work, representative of contemporary wooden sculpture of the Basque Country, with an abstract conception. While alive, the institutions purchase his work during the 70’s-80’s-90’s and, after his death they continue to deal with his wife and with private collectors. Vicente Larrea belongs to this group of Basque sculptors whose work falls within the desire for creating indigenous and experimental artworks that makes headway with great difficulty. Larrea was part of the Biscayan group Emen and receives funding very early, to be concise since the 60’s, when the institutions purchase his first pieces and continue during the next decades.

Finally, we will analyse acquisitions of the artists of the most current scene, those born after the 40’s, included in table 4. All of them are the result of individual experiences, ranging from the different nuances of lyric abstraction linked to the Basque landscape, to gestural and material abstraction, figurative trends and even new Realism. Their work is characterised by the plurality of expressive languages as a result of an individual response already triggered in the previous decades, but rather associated with the current artistic development of the national and international scene.


16

Thus, Carmelo Ortiz Elguea is subsidized with purchases in the 60’s-70’s-80’s and 2000; Andrés Nágel, in the 70’s-80’s-90’s and 2001; Alfonso Gortázar, in the 80’s-90’s and 2000, being 1990 his most prolific year with 7 pieces, the same as Dora Salazar, with 8 artworks. The same happens to José Ramón Amondarain and to Francisco de Blas who, in their thirties, enter the institutions, keeping the level of purchases until the first years of the twenty-first century.

In the end, the middle class artist (table 5) are subsidized almost permanently, in almost all the cases, with purchases concentrated in the 90’s that, let us reiterate, is the decade in which most of the institutional purchases occurred, as with Fernando Illana, Daniel Tamayo, José Ángel Lasa, Iñaki Cerrajería, Jesús Mª Lazkano, Javier Ortiz de Guinea, Alberto Rementería and Juan Luis Moraza. All of them have around 30 or 40 years old in the 90’s, that is, when their professional consolidation is starting and, at the same time, it corresponds to the reorganization and the boosting of Basque museum institutions, which allowed the peculiar and very favourable taxation and autonomous Treasury in the three historical territories of the Basque Country.

4. Conclusion.

Regarding the creation and formation of the collections of Basque public museums, although have common background with similar artistic institutions of Spain, positive differences can be seen due to the early industrialization, in Hispanic terms, of Biscay and Gipuzkoa, also because of the historical phenomenon of their foral advantages in tax and autonomous Treasury, as well as of the urban development of their respective capitals. Although in the initial collections, donations and loans are fundamental, while the fiscal forality lasts until 1937, artworks starts to be acquired for the collections, albeit with a very weak presence of contemporary Basque authors. In Alava, modernised in a much later stage, the maintenance of foral Treasury during Franco period allows to shape the Museo de Bellas Artes de Vitoria, a very powerful collection, derived from an important role of the purchases since the 50’s. The Spanish Constitution of 1978 and the immediate autonomy of the Basque Country, with the restoration of Biscay’s and Gipuzkoa’s forality, allow the institutions to introduce –during the 80’s and, particularly, the 90’s, after overcoming the crisis of the previous decade– a strong public policy for purchasing artworks, where now, in the three territories, Basque author’s works play a very important role.

The analysis of these acquisitions, that we have carried out in headings 2 and 3, allows us to affirm, without any doubt, the existence of the subsidized muse in the Basque Country for the last decades of the twentieth century and continuing the current century. This encouraged directly the artists that were born on or after the mid-decades of the twentieth century (almost half hundred), since they collected substantial amounts for their artworks purchased by the Basque public institutions. In addition, in the case of the younger and more current artists, since their work becomes part of the permanent


17

collections of the Basque museums, the public recognition, the visibility, has enhanced locally, nationally and even internationally their present and future careers.

.


18

References: Alonso Olea, E., 1995. El concierto económico (1878-1937): orígenes y formación de un derecho histórico. Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco.

Antigüedad del Castillo-Olivares, M. D., 1998. El Museo de la Trinidad, germen del museo público en España. Espacio, Tiempo y Forma. Serie VII. Historia del Arte, Volumen 11, pp. 367-396.

Badía Lacalle, Jacinto (Comp.), 1975. El concierto económico con Álava y su legislación complementaria. Vitoria: Diputación Foral de Álava.

Banfield, E. C., 1984. The Democratic Muse: Visual Arts and the Public Interest. New York: Basic Book.

Barre, M. d. l., Doccio, S. & Ginsburgh, V., 1994. Returns of Impressionist, Modern and Contemporary European Paintings 1962-1991. Annales d'économie et de statistique, Volumen 41, pp. 325-335.

Baumaul, W. J., 1986. Unnatural Value: or Art Investment as Floating Crap Game. American Economic Review. Papaers and Proceedings, Issue 76, pp. 10-14.

Begoña, A. d., Beriain, M. J. & Martínez de Salinas, F., 1982. Museo de Bellas Artes de Álava. Vitoria: Diputación Foral de Álava.

Blaugh, Mark, 1976. The Economics of the Arts. London: Martin Robertson and Co..

Castañer López, X. & Hernández Marco, J. L., 2014. La financiación de las infraestructuras culturales: la inversión institucional en fondos museísticos y la capacidad de gasto de las Haciendas Forales vascas en el siglo XX. [On line] Available at: http://www.aehe.net/xicongreso/pdfs/s4_castaner_hdez.pdf

Castells, L., 1987. Modernización y dinámica política de la sociedad guipuzcoana de la Restauración, 1876-1915. Madrid: Siglo XXI y Universidad del País Vasco.

Cummings, Milton C.; Davison-Schuster, J.M.(eds), 1989. Who's to Pay for the Arts: The International Search for Models of Art Support. New York: American Council for the Arts.

Cummings, Milton C.; Katz, Richard M. (eds), 1987. The patron state: government and the arts in Europe, North America and Japan. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

DiMaggio, Paul J.(ed), 1986. Nonprofit Enterprise in the Arts: Studies in Mission and Constraint. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.


19

Feldstein, Martin (ed), 1991. The Economics of Art Museums. Chicago: Chicago University Press and NBER Conference Repport.

Frey, B. S., 1994. Cultural Economic and Museum Behavior. Scottish Jounal of Political Economy, Volumen 41, pp. 325-335.

Frey, B. S. & Pommerehne, W. W., 1990. Muses and Markets: Explorations in the Economic of the Arts. Oxford: Blackwell.

García Zúñiga, M., 2009. El desarrollismo antes del desarrollismo: la industrialización de Álava. Revista de Historia Industrial, Issue 41, pp. 91-124.

Gérard-Varet, Louis A. (ed), 1989. Formation des prix de peintures modernes et conteporaines et rentabilité des placements sur le marché de l'art. Aix en Provence and Marseille: Université d'Aix-Marseille II et III.

Geztner, M., 2002. Determinant of Public Cultural Expenditures: an Explanatory Time Series Analisys for Austria. Journal of Cultural Economics, Issue 26, pp. 287-306.

Ginsburgh, Victor and David Throsby, eds. , 2006. Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture. Amsterdam: North Holland.

Goetzmann, W. N., 1993. Accounting the Taste: Art and the Financial Market Over Three Centuries. American Economic Review, Vol. 83, pp. 1370-1376.

González de Aspuru, S. & Sancristóval, P., 2001. El Museo de Bellas Artes de Álava y su colección de Arte Vasco. In: S. GONZÁLEZ DE ASPURU & A. DABOUZA, edits. Arte vasco hasta los 50 en el Museo de Bellas Artes de Álava. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Diputación Foral. Servicio de Publicaciones, pp. 19-32.

Grampp, W. D., 1989. Pricing the Priceless, Art, Artists and Economics. New York: Basic Books Inc..

Hendon, William S.; Hillman-Chartrand, Harry; Horowitz, Harold (eds), 1989. Paying for the Arts. Akron: Akron University Press.

Hernández Marco, J. L., 2002. Desarrollo urbano y autobuses de transporte público: Transportes Urbanos de Vitoria, S.A.. Revista de Historia TST. Transportes, Servicios y Telecomunicaciones, Issue 3-4, pp. 37-71.

Hernández Marco, J. L., 2008. Il trasporto pubblico urbano in una città della provincia spagnola in forte i ritardat crescita: Vitoria (1864-1967). Ricerche Storiche. Revista Quadrimestrale, XXVII(2), pp. 331-356.

Johnson, P. & Thomas, B., 1998. The Economic of Museums: A Research Perpective. Journal of Cultural Economics, 22(2 y 3), pp. 75-85.

Khakee, A., 1988. The Rationale for Urban Government Action for Arts Funding. Journal of Cultural Economics, 12(2), pp. 1-18.


20

Lord, B., Lord, G. D. & Nicks, J., 1989. The Cost of Collecting: Collecction Management in U.K. Museums. London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.

Luna, J. J., 1989. El Museo de Bellas Artes de Bilbao. Historia y actualidad. In: Catálogo. Tesoros del Museo de Bellas Artes de Bilbao. Pintura: 1400-1939. Bilbao: Diputación Foral de Vizcaya y Ayuntamiento de Bilbao, pp. 17-20.

Moulain, R., Passeron, J.-C., Pasquier, D. & Porto-Vasquez, F., 1984. Les artistes : Essai de morphologie sociale. Paris: Centre de Sociologie des Arts ; EHESS; CNRS.

Netzer, D., 1978. The Subsidized Muse: Public Support for the Arts in the United States. Cambridge and New York: Cambirdge University Press.

Nicolau, A. & Zulaika, R., 2005. Donostia:el Patrimonio es futuro. Refundación del Museo San Telomo y Anteproyecto para el sector del patrimonio cultural de Donostia-San Sebstián. [On line] Available at: http://www.donostiakultura.com/.[Last access: 12.5.2010].

Owen, Virginia L.; Hendon, William S.(eds), 1985. Managerial Economic of the Arts. Akron: Association for Cultural Economics.

Pommerhne, W. W. & Feld, L. P., 1997. The Impact of Museum Pruchase on the Auction Price of Paintings. Journal of Cultural Economics, Volumen 21, pp. 249-271.

Prados de la Escosura, L., 2003. El progreso económico de España (1850-2000). Madrid: Fundación BBVA.

Reitlinger, G., 1961. The Economics of Taste, Vol.1: The Rise and Fall of Picture Prices 1760-1960. London: Barrie & Jenkins.

Rivera Blanco, A., 1992. La ciudad levítica. Continuidad y cambio en una ciudad del interior (Vitoria, 1876-1936). Vitoria: Diputación Foral de Álava.

Shaw, D. V., Hendon, W. S. & Waits, R. C., 1987. Artists and Cultural Economics. Akron: Akron University Press.

Singer, L. P., 1978. Microeconomic of the Art Market. Journal of Cultural Economics, Volumen 2, pp. 21-40.

Singer, L. P. & Lynch, G., 1994. Public Choice in the Tertiary Art Market. Journal of Economic History, Volumen 18, pp. 199-216.

Throsby, D., 1994. The production and consumption of the arts: A view of cultural economics. Journal of Economic Literature, Volumen XXXII, pp. 1-29.

Towse, Ruth (ed), 2011. A handbook of Cultural Economics, Second Edition. Northampton: Edward Elgar.


21

Vicario y Peña, Nicolás; Alonso Olea, Eduardo, 1997. Los conciertos económicos de las provincias vascongadas. Bilbao: Diputación de Bizkaia.

Zugaza Miranda, M., 1999. Pasado y presente del Museo de Bellas Artes de Bilbao. In: M. ZUGAZA, ed. Museo de Bellas Artes de Bilbao. Maestros Antiguos y Modernos. Bilbao: Fundación B.B.K., pp. 15-32.


22

Table 1: Purchases of artists’ works by the main institutions of the Basque Country in the twentieth century

BASQUE ARTISTS OTHER ARTISTS TOTAL OF ARTISTS

INSTITUTION PURCHASED WITH COST

Current Pesetas

PURCHASED WITH COST

Current Pesetas

PURCHASED WITH COST

Current

Pesetas

BBAA de Álava 227 220 232,911,824 85 82 26,487,756 312 302 259,399,580

ARTIUM 256 240 218,664,526 507 496 553,288,861 763 736 771,953,387

Alava Provincial Council 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Total Alava 484 460 451,576,350 592 578 579,776,617 1,076 1,038 1,031,352,967

BBAA de Bilbao 282 234 448,304,210 414 331 781,580,117 696 565 1,229,884,327

Biscay Provincial Council 319 315 676,463,523 245 237 581,473,309 564 552 1,257,936,832

Total Biscay 601 549 1,124,767,733 659 568 1,363,053,426 1,260 1,117 2,487,821,159

San Telmo in San Sebastian 99 0 0 53 1 700 152 1 700

Gipuzkoa Provincial Council 211 156 164,524,839 34 18 9,744,678 245 174 174,269,517

Total Gipuzkoa 310 156 164,524,839 87 19 9,745,378 397 175 174,270,217

TOTAL BASQUE COUNTRY

1,395 1,165 1,740,868,922 1,338 1,165 1,952,575,421 2,733 2,330 3,693,444,343

Notes: The final years of the inventories used for the different institutions are: in Alava, 2003 and 2002 for MALA and ARTIUM; in Biscay, 2002 for the Museum and the Provincial Council; and in Gipuzkoa, 1999 for

San Telmo Museum and for the Provincial Council.

Source: Inventories.


23

Table 2: Cost of artworks in constant € of 1995 value purchased at Basque Artits during the twentieth century

1900-1937 1940-1978 1979-2003 Total Pieces Euros

1995 Pieces Euros

1995 Pieces Euros

1995 Pieces Euros 1995

Álava 0 0 122 2,903,490 297 2,261,819 460 5,331,403Biscay 48 240,872 76 386,351 425 8,519,158 549 9,146,381Gipuzkoa 11 76,380 15 46,942 123 1,291,584 156 1,414,855Total Basque Country

59 317,252 213 3,336,783 845 12,072,561 1165 15,892,639

Notes: The final years of the inventories used for the different institutions are: in Alava, 2003; in Biscay; and in Gipuzkoa, 1995. Conversion to € after deflating with (Prados de la Escosura, 2003) and (INE). 166.368 Pesetas = 1 €



24

Table 3: Frequencies of the number of works acquired from Basque artists in the twentieth century

Pieces Artists % Artists Total Pieces

% Pieces

1 186 44.08% 186 13.33%

2-3 119 28.20% 281 20.14%

4-6 69 16.35% 320 22.94%

7-10 24 5.69% 204 14.62%

11-15 14 3.32% 175 12.54%

16-20 4 0.95% 68 4.87%

More than 20 6 1.42% 161 11.54%

TOTAL 422 100.00% 1,395 100.00%



25

Table 4: The 33 Top Basque artists with 10 or more artworks purchased by the Basque institutions

ARTIST (Birth-Death) Pieces Purchases 1st - last BUYERS Pieces with cost

€ of 1995 value Average

ECHENAGUSIA ERRAZQUIN, JOSÉ IGNACIO (Gipuzkoa, Hondarribia 1844- Rome 1912

11 4 1912-2002 MBIL(1); DVIZ(7); MALA(1); DGUIP(2)

10 496,500.98 49.650,10

ARTETA ERRASTI, AURELIO (Biscay, Bilbao 1879-Mexico 1940)

21 11 1913-1999 MBIL(10); DVIZ(7);

MALA(3);STELMO(1) 20 1,163,463.69 58.173,18

GUINEA, ANSELMO (Bilbao, Biscay 1854-1906) 14 6 1914-2001 DVIZ(11); MALA(2);

DGUIP(1) 13 410,752,26 31.596,33

URANGA Y DIAZ DE ARCAYA, PABLO (Alava, , Araba 1861 – San Sebastian, Gipuzkoa,1934)

16 9 1916-2002

MBIL(1); DVIZ(1); MALA(11); DGUIP(2);

STELMO(1)

14 70,542,79 5.038,77

LARROQUE ECHEVARRIA, ANGEL (Bilbao, Baiscay 1874-1961)

10 4 1917-1990 MBIL(3); DVIZ(5);

MALA(2) 9 73,950.35 8.216,71

BARROETA Y ANGUISOLA, JUAN DE (Biscay, Bilbao 1835-1906)

12 3 1918-1990 MBIL(2); DVIZ(10) 12 76,928.06 6.410,67

REGOYOS VALDES, Darío de (Asturias, Ribadesella 1857-Barcelona 1913)

30 13 1918-2000 MBIL(16); DVIZ(1);

MALA(1); DGUIP(2); MTELMO(10)

9 474,848.17 52.760,91

LOSADA Y PEREZ DE NENIN, G.M.J. (Biscay , Bilbao 1865-1949)

24 7 1919-2002 MBIL(7); DVIZ(13); MALA(2); DGUIP(2)

22 358,622.54 16.301,02

TELLAECHE Y ALDASORO, JULIAN DE 10 7 1920-1994 MBIL(3); DVIZ(3); 9 126,629.82 14.069,98


26

(Gipuzkoa, Vergara 1884-Lima, Perú 1957) MALA(2); DGUIP(1); STELMO(1)

ITURRINO GONZALEZ, FRANCISCO (Santander 1864- Cagnes-sur-Mer, France 1924)

11 7 1924-1998 MBIL(8); MALA(3) 8 152,312.74 19.039,09

ARANOA Y CARREDANO, JUAN DE (Biscay, 1901- Argentina, Olivos)

14 9 1925-2000 MBIL(10); DVIZ(3); MALA(1)

12 204,091.40 17,007.62

MARTIARENA LASKURAIN, ASCENSIO (Gipuzkoa, Donostia-SanSebastian 1883-1966)

10 6 1928-2002 MBIL(2); MALA(2);DGUIP(2); STELMO(4)

6 24,686.28 4,114.38

MAEZTU Y WHITNEY, GUSTAVO DE (Alava, Vitoria 1887- Navarra, Estella 1947)

10 7 1928-2003 MBIL(3); DVIZ(2); MALA(5)

9 95,100.20 10,566.69

ECHEVARRIA Y ZURICALAY, JUAN DE (Biscay, Bilbao 1875- Madrid 1931)

26 8 1931-1990 MBIL(7); DVIZ(3); MALA(16)

26 1,371,902.88 52,765.50

ARRUE VALLE, ALBERTO (Biscay, Bilbao 1878-1944)

18 5 1931-1994 MBIL(6); DVIZ(12) 17 290,832.37 17,107.79

DIAZ DE OLANO, IGNACIO (Alava, Vitoria 1860-1937)

22 11 1951-2001 MBIL(1); DVIZ (2); MALA(19)

21 883,409.09 42,067.10

CHILLIDA JUANTEGUI, GONZALO (Gipuzkoa, Donostia-San Sebastián 1926-2008)

10 6 1953-1995 MBIL(3); ARTIUM(2); DGUIP(3); STELMO(2)

8 35,705.85 4,463.23

UCELAY Y URIARTE, JOSE MARIA (Biscay, Bermeo 1903-1980)

13 11 1954-2001 MBIL(10); MALA(3) 12 139,785.52 11,648.79


27

RUIZ BALERDI, RAFAEL, (Gipuzkoa, San Sebastián 1934- Alicante, Altea 1992)

13 7 1958-1993 MBIL(6); ARTIUM(3); DGUIP(2); MTELMO(2)

10 191,196.75 19,119.68

GORDONGARCIA-ROBLES,Rogelio (Oviedo, 1860-Gipuzkoa, Donostia-SanSebastián 1938)

10 2 1963-1984 DGUIP(6); STELMO(4)

1 4421.37 4,421.37

GARCIA ERGUIN, IGNACIO (Biscay, Bilbao 1934)

12 3 1965-1991 MBIL(2); DVIZ(10) 12 19,961.18 1,663.43

ORTIZ DE ELGUEA JAUREGUI, C. (Alava, Vitoria 1944)

10 7 1966-2000 MBIL(4); DVIZ(1); ARTIUM(5)

10 129,396.57 12,939.66

ZUMETA ECHEBERRIA, J.L., (Gipuzkoa, Usúrbil 1939)

14 9 1971-2000 MBIL(3); DVIZ(3); ARTIUM(2); DGUIP(5); STELMO(1)

13 59,802.97 4,600.23

BASTERRETXEA ARZADUN, NÉSTOR (Biscay, Beremeo 1924 – Gipuzkoa, Hondarribia 2014)

10 8 1973-2002 MBIL(1); DVIZ(2); ARTIUM(5); DGUIP(2)

9 364,612.76 40,512.53

NAGEL TEJADA, Andrés ( Gipuzkoa, San Sebastián 1947)

14 8 1976-2001 MBIL(6); ARTIUM(3); DGUIP (3); STELMO(2)

12 104,592.33 8,716.03

CHILLIDA JUANTEGUI, EDUARDO (Gipuzkoa, San Sebastián 1924-2003)

16 7 1981-2002 MBIL(10); ARTIUM(4); DGUIP(2)

15 719,987.06 47,999.14

OTEIZA EMBIL, JORGE (Gipuzkoa, Orio 1908, 18 4 1982-1999 MBIL(5); ARTIUM(6);

16 321,132.25 20,070.77


28

San Sebastián 203) DGUIP(6); STELMO(1)

GORTAZAR ORUE, ALFONSO (Biscay, Bilbao 1955)

12 6 1983-2002 MBIL(1); DVIZ(8); MALA(2); ARTIUM(1)

11 41,016.05 3,728.73

DIAZ FERNANDEZ, J. (A Coruña, Ferrol 1922 – Gipuzkoa, San Sebastián 2012

11 2 1986-1987 DGUIP(11) 1 1,011.68 1,011.68

BRUSTIN, Domingo y Sebastián de Galbarriatu ( Actives in Bilbao, 16th Century)

37 1 1990-1990 DVIZ(37) 37 109,572.49 2,961.42

SALAZAR, DORA (Navarra, Alsásua 1963) 11 4 1990-2000 DVIZ(10); DGUIP(1) 11 51,148.90 4,649.90

AMONDARAIN UBARRECHENA, J.R. (Gipuzkoa, San Sebastián 1964)

10 3 1990-2001 DVIZ(1); ARTIUM(7); DGUIPUZ(2)

5 15,872.45 3,174.49

BLAS, FRANCISCO DE (Biscay, Bilbao 1960) 12 4 1995-2001 DVIZ(12) 12 28,935.22 2,411.27

TOTAL 460 198 1913-2003 374 8,020,267.47 21,444.57

Source: Inventories. Deflator for pesetas of 1995 value (PRADOS DE LA ESCOSURA, L. (2001) and (I.N.E.), converted into €. 166.368 Pesetas = 1 €


29

Table 5: the 26 “middle-class” Basque artists with between six and nine pieces purchased by Basque institutions

ARTIST (Birth-Death) Pieces Purchases 1st - last BUYERS Pieces with cost

€ of 1995 value Average

IRURETA Y ARTOLA, ALEJANDRINO (Gipuzkoa,Tolosa 1854 -Donostia-SanSebastian 1912) 6 4 1912-1993 STELMO(6) 0 0.00 0.00

BARRUETA ASTEINZA,BENITO (Biscay, Bermeo 1873-1953 7 7 1918-2001 MBIL(6); MALA(1) 5 43,464.57 8,692.91

LECUONA Y ECHANIZ , ANTONIO M. (Gipuzkoa,cTolosa 1831- Biscay,Ondarroa 1907) 6 3 1931-1990

MBIL(1);DVIZ(3); STELMO(2) 3 41,381.93 13,793.98

MONTES ITURRIOZ, GASPAR (Gipuzkoa, Irun 1901 - ) 6 4 1932-2001

MBIL(1); MALA(1); DGUIP(3);

STELMO(1) 5 17,361.55 3,472.31

OLASAGASTI IRIGOYEN, JESÚS (Gipuzkoa, Donostia-San Sebastián, 1907-id, 1955) 9 8 1932-2003

MBIL(2); NALA(2); DGUIP(2)

STELMO(3) 5 16,228.21 3,245.64

URRUTIA OLARAN, JENARO DE (Biscay, Plencia 1893-Bilbao 1965) 8 6 1935-2001

MBIL(2); DVIZ(4); MALA(1);

ARTIUM(1) 6 47,900.38 7,983.40

ACEBAL IDIGORAS, ARTURO,(Argentine, Tres Albarrobos 1912 – Biscay, Bilbao 1977) 8 7 1953-1990

MBIL(6); DVIZ(1); MALA(1) 7 7,384.50 1,054.93

SUAREZ ALBA, ENRIQUE (Alava,Vitoria-Gasteiz 1921-1986) 7 5 1956-2002

MALA(6); STELMO(1) 6 11,324.42 1,887.40


30

ARIAS YEBRA, AMABLE (Leon, Bembibre 1927-Gipuzkoa, Donostia-San Sebastián 1984) 7 5 1960-1997

MBIL(3); DGUIP(1); STELMO(3) 1 7,384.14 7,384.14

LAFUENTE PASCUAL, RAFAEL (Alava, Vitoria 1936-2005) 6 5 1967-1998 ARTIUM(6) 6 20,695.77 3,449.29

LARREA GAYARRE, VICENTE (Biscay, Bilbao 1934) 7 6 1968-1997

MBIL(3); DVIZ(3); ARTIUM(1) 7 367,721.60 52,531.66

MENDIBURU MIRANDA, REMIGIO (Gipuzkoa, Hondarribia 1931-Barcelona 1990) 7 7 1971-1995

MBIL(2); ARTIUM(2); DGUIP(2);

STELMO(1) 6 272,334.30 45,389.05

MORAZA RUIZ, ANGEL (Alava, Vitoria 1917-1978) 8 2 1976-1979 MALA(8) 8 10,625.57 1,328.20

IBARROLA GOICOEXTEA, AGUSTIN (Biscay, Basauri 1937) 8 5 1977-1999

MBIL(4); DVIZ(3); (ARTIUM(1) 8 406,618.12 50,827.26

ILLANA GARCIA, FERNANDO (Toledo, Talavera de la Reina 1950) 6 6 1979-2001

ARTIUM(5); DGUIP(1) 5 27,467.55 5,493.51

LEKUONA NAZABAL, NICOLÁS (Gipuzkoa,Ordizia, 1913-Biscay,Frúniz, 1937) 9 6 1981-2001

MBIL(2); ARTIUM(2);

DGUP(3); STELMO(2) 7 71,521.37 10,217.34

TAMAYO POZUETA, DANIEL ( Biscay, Bilbao 1951) 7 5 1982-2002

MBIL(2); DVIZ(4); ARTIUM (1) 6 15,867.47 2,644.58

LASA GARICANO, JOSÉ ÁNGEL (Gipuzkoa, Legorreta 1948) 7 2 1984-1990 DVIZ(5); ARTIUM(2) 7 30,181.72 4,311.67


31

CERRAJERIA, IÑAKI (Alava, Vitoria 1957) 6 4 1985-1999 ARTIUM(5);

DGUIP(1) 4 10,690.71 2,672.68

CABANAS OTEIZA, ANGEL, Gipuzkoa, San Sebastián 1833?- Argentine, Tandil 1965) 6 4 1985-2001

MIBIL(1); MALA(4); DGUIP(1) 5 15,799.70 3,159.94

LAZKANO, JESUS MARÍA (Gipuzkoa, Bergara 1960) 9 5 1985-2002

MBIL(3); DVIZ(3); ARTIUM(1); DGUIP(1);

STELMO(1) 6 32,636.99 5,439.50

ORTIZ DE GUINEA DIAZ DE OTALORA, JAVIER (Alava, Vitoria 1946) 7 5 1988-2000 MALA(6); DGUIP(1) 7 17,435.67 2,490.81

REMENTERIA, ALBERTO (Biscay, Bilbao 1953) 6 3 1990-2000 DVIZ(5); ARTIUM(1) 6 17,986.68 2,997.78

NIETO ULLIBARRI, ENRIQUE (Biscay, Valle de Trápaga 1890- Bilbao 1963) 7 3 1990-2002 DVIZ(6); MALA(1) 7 17,512.78 2,501.83

MORAZA PEREZ, JUAN LUIS (Alava, Vitoria 1960) 9 3 1990-2001

ARTIUM(2); DGUIP(7) 9 13,175.21 1,463.91

DUBLANG URANGA, TEODORO (Alava, Vitoria 1874-1940) 6 3 1991-1993 MALA(6) 4 5,406.51 1,351.63

TOTAL 185 123 1912-2003 146 1,546,107.41 10,589.78

Source: Inventories. Deflator for pesetas of 1995 value (PRADOS DE LA ESCOSURA, L (2001) and (I.N.E.), converted into €. 166.368 Pesetas = 1 €


32

FIGURES

Figure 1: Number of Basque artists’ pieces with known cost acquired by the Basque institutions


220

240

0

234

315

0156

BBAA of Álava

ARTIUM

Álava ProvincialCouncil

BBAA of Bilbao

Biskay ProvincialCouncil

BBAA of Álava19%

ARTIUM21%

Álava Provincial Council0%

BBAA of Bilbao20%

Biskay Provincial Council27%

San Telmo in S.Sebastian

0%

Gipuzkoa Provincial Council13%


33

Figure 2: Total cost (in current pesetas) of purchases from Basque artists in the twentieth century


232,911,824

218,664,526

0

448,304,210676,463,523

0

164,524,839

BBAA of Álava

ARTIUM

Álava ProvincialCouncil

BBAA of Bilbao

Biskay ProvincialCouncil

San Telmo inS.Sebastian

BBAA of Álava13%

ARTIUM13%

Álava Provincial Council0%

BBAA of Bilbao26%

Biskay Provincial Council39%

San Telmo in S.Sebastian

0%

Gipuzkoa Provincial Council9%


34

Figure 3: Annual number of Basque artists’ pieces acquired in the three provinces


1

2

4

8

16

32

64

128

256

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

ALAVA

GIPUZKOA

BISKAY


35

Figure 4: Artworks acquired from Basque artists: Total annual cost in constant Euros (pesetas of 1995 value)


500

2,000

8,000

32,000

128,000

512,000

2,048,0001900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

ALAVA

GIPUZKOA

BISKAY


36

Figure 5: Artworks acquired from Basque artists: Average annual cost in constant Euros (pesetas of 1995 value)


500

2,500

12,500

62,500

312,5001900

1906

1912

1918

1924

1930

1936

1942

1948

1954

1960

1966

1972

1978

1984

1990

1996

2002

AVERAGE ÁLAVA

AVERAGE BISKAY

AVERAGE GIPUZKOA


37

Figure 6: Artworks acquired from Basque artists: absolute frequencies of the number of pieces

Source: Inventories

Figure 7: Artworks acquired from Basque artists: relative frequencies of the number of pieces


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1 2‐3 4‐6 7‐10 11‐15 16‐20 > 20

Artits

Total Pieces

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

1 2‐3 4‐6 7‐10 11‐15 16‐20 > 20

% Artists

% Total Works

A determinant of creativity: the public art acquisitions at the Spanish Basque Country in the 20th...

Documents

Transcript of A determinant of creativity: the public art acquisitions at the Spanish Basque Country in the 20th...