The collector as curator

That collectors come in different hues is no surprise, but I've had the good fortune to meet some in recent times who exist so much outside the mainstream that if you didn't personally know them, you'd think they were phantoms or existed only in the imagination. This is especially relevant when, already, a new generation of collectors has begun to call the shots and is not necessarily driven by the glamour associated with collecting in a public way. Some are young, others in their middle-age, most come from environments with no previous collecting background in their families or even a history of art appreciation or formal cultural environment. 

That they're big-ticket spenders isn't the surprise as much as the fact that they're shrewder, better collectors than those from previous generations. They're formidably informed, know their minds, don't mind the spends, aren't easily disrupted by shoptalk, but find the technical itsy-bitsies a great turn-on. They'll want provenance histories, condition reports (in great detail), context and relevance highlighted and underlined. Nor are they flamboyant: you could be excused for thinking them outside the market for their wallpaper-like quality to disappear in a crowd - perhaps the reason they go unnoticed at talks, launches and auctions. But make no mistake, what they lack in flamboyance they more than make up for in knowledge. 

For a previous generation, the seductions of being on panels and talkathons, being quoted by the media and turning up in page 3 pictures was a diversionary attraction. The current lot of spenders is far more discreet and doesn't want it known who or what they're collecting, allowing them to walk through exhibitions and art fairs without an adulatory group of sellers in their wake. They wander around unnoticed, spectres in a gallery unacknowledged by everyone but the CCTVs. Yet, they're the ones pursuing the finest works, the anonymous buyers whose names are never mentioned for fear of reprisals: who'd want to share a name for a gloat when negotiation could be seriously hampered by a slip of the tongue?

One I know is buying up masters, another is collecting works from a definite period by a single artist, yet another has only a few artists in his portfolio, each of them a priceless gem. These collectors aren't easily seduced, they expend their energies on chasing exemplar quality, and they know their investment's worth - which is why they aren't looking for bargains or deals. No work is worth the cheque that's written for it if it isn't of superb and singular merit.

I recently saw a collection of one such collector - virtually, of course - and it blew me away for its singular pursuit of excellence with just two artists whose exceptionally rare works form part of his outstanding collection. That it hasn't been shown publicly, or been reported, makes it even more outstanding, and the collector is astute enough to realise its value and maintain a low profile - at least till such time as he's continuing to build the collection unhampered by any distractions. Till such time as the inventory becomes known to a wider public, I'm assuming that every great work by the two artists is landing up in his collection, unless there is reason to believe otherwise. 

Such collectors could give curators a run for their money. I admit to feeling humbled by them and their understanding, and their inflexibility to let anything sub-par slip past their experienced eyes. It is a great ability and comes from confidence rather than greed, with these collectors acting as curators. If, and when, they open their collection to the public, you can take it from me that it will prove a catalytic eye-opener for the world.

Kishore Singh is a Delhi-based writer and art critic. These views are personal and do not reflect those of the organisation with which he is associated