How do you evaluate the shift of the art market’s centre from the West toward Asia and the Gulf region?
Of course, all of this is related to the flow of money within the financial world. Since the late 20th century, there has been a transformation globally. China experienced major development, and there was significant progress across the East Asian bloc. As a result, Asian countries began to compete economically with Europe and the United States. The shift of global capital toward this region inevitably carried art along with it. American and European gallerists started opening spaces in China and Hong Kong. More recently, this interest has shifted toward Arab countries.
The system in the region has developed in the following way: Museums designed by world-renowned architects have begun to be established in Gulf countries, particularly in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. These structures are playing a decisive role in transforming the region into an art hub in a short period of time. The establishment of major museums also paved the way for Western galleries to open branches in the region. Subsequently, tax exemptions generated significant interest among European and American gallerists and collectors. As a result, the region today stands on the threshold of becoming a major art centre.
Should we see this transformation as a temporary market expansion, or does the Gulf have the potential to become a permanent art centre in the coming years?
Time will show how many years this process will continue; perhaps people will witness it for 50 or even 70 years. However, it is already evident that the region is creating a major impact. The contraction of the European market and the slowdown in the United States have redirected the art world’s attention toward Middle Eastern countries, their museums, and galleries. This has created a significant market in the region, one that also contributes to the development of the global art scene.
For instance, museums opened in Doha, institutions in the United Arab Emirates, large-scale projects such as Louvre Abu Dhabi, and museums dedicated to promoting Islamic art are creating a strong cultural infrastructure in the Gulf. Cultural buildings and museum projects designed by world-famous architects such as Chinese-American architect I. M. Pei and Jean Nouvel represent important architectural and institutional markers of this transformation. As a result of all these developments, a strong art centre has already emerged in the region, although the direction it will take remains a dynamic and evolving process.
Can this process be considered the emergence of a new centre on the global art map?
It may or may not be. Because art, particularly plastic arts, was born in Europe and flourished in the United States. Middle Eastern countries do not possess a deeply rooted tradition connected to Western art. Of course, they have strong traditions such as calligraphy, miniature painting, and carpet arts; however, if we exclude these, what we see is essentially an attempt to construct a new tradition. By establishing museums, opening galleries, and offering tax incentives, a large-scale art trade environment is being created. When you consider the level of capital investment—hundreds of millions of dollars—it is clear that such investments will not be abandoned easily. Therefore, it is highly likely that these regions will continue to function as art centres for a long time.
“If I Were 30, I Would Want to Try My Chances”
If you were starting out today as a young gallerist, how would this emerging art environment in the Gulf make you feel? Would you want to be part of it?
Possibly. However, due to my age, I have spent most of my time in Europe and the United States. When I opened my gallery 50 years ago, there was nothing particularly remarkable happening there. My education focused on Italian, French, German, British, and American art; our entire centre was European art. Museums, published books, the lives of collectors, and auction houses were all concentrated in Europe and America. Therefore, I never considered such an expansion. But if I were 30, I might have wanted to try my chances.
How could such an attempt have been made? Would it have been possible with only Turkish art, or by engaging with international art? Frankly, working only with Turkish art would have been quite difficult. Perhaps I could have tried to create a centre there together with internationally recognised artists. Of course, this sounds rather utopian at the moment. It may also be a very romantic statement…
What do you think is the most fragile point of this new centre?
As I mentioned earlier, everything here is connected to capital. The oil and natural gas reserves of Arab countries also have a limited lifespan. The economic structure of the region is largely dependent on the global financial system and Western-centred capital flows. In the event of any economic downturn or crisis, they could lose everything. This is my view. None of these Arab countries have strong military-industrial infrastructure or heavy industry. In a potential crisis, they would not be in a position to sustain a war independently. Most of their military equipment is purchased from the United States, which creates dependency. If the United States wished, it could exercise this power as it sees fit. Even Saudi Arabia, considered one of the richest countries in the world, is in a similar position.
The Shadow of Wall Street: The Dependent Structure of the Gulf Economy
If two people on Wall Street decided today to “abandon Qatar,” Qatar could collapse within a day. All revenues generated from oil and natural gas in Qatar circulate within the Wall Street-centred global financial system. If that flow of capital were to stop, the system would collapse. This represents a constant area of vulnerability and uncertainty for Gulf countries.
Yes, they are in a strong position today, but we cannot predict where the world will move in the future. The extraction of oil, the relocation of the art market, and tax exemptions are exciting many people. Construction projects and investments are being carried out in the region, but it is difficult to determine how long this momentum will last.
Is it possible to predict the direction this new art environment might evolve toward?
The centre still remains the United States and Europe. However, in the Far East, countries such as South Korea have made significant progress. These regions must be observed and tested. Capital, by its nature, is unstable; it constantly moves around the world. It flows to wherever money exists, grows there, and may later return elsewhere. War conditions, economic crises, and natural disasters are all determining factors. Nothing remains static. Everything could proceed very successfully in the Middle East for fifty or even one hundred years, and then the centre could shift again. At this point, the only prediction I can make is that nothing is guaranteed.
Do you think this region could eventually develop its own art history?
Certainly. Every country has an artistic historical trajectory. Over the last 30 to 40 years, enormous investments—amounting to billions of dollars—have been made. Books will be written about this period in art history, films will be produced, exhibitions will be documented, and works entering museum collections will be catalogued. Therefore, an art history will inevitably emerge from the Middle East as well.
How would you position Türkiye within this emerging art environment?
Each country in the region has its own artists, but most are not internationally recognised; they are primarily known within their own countries. Museums and galleries tend to exhibit or collect artists born and trained in the West—European and American artists with international recognition. Therefore, establishing a connection with Türkiye is somewhat difficult at present. Still, Sevil Dolmacı opening an exhibition space in Dubai is very encouraging and significant, as it represents a pioneering initiative.
“The System There Operates Differently”
To answer your question, I would say Türkiye remains somewhat outside this system, because the system there operates differently. For example, you look at Saudi Arabia, and you see a mayor who graduated from Oxford. Their educational structure is positioned differently, influenced by their colonial histories. The Ottoman Empire, by contrast, was never colonised and remained more inward-looking as a society.
What are the main reasons Türkiye occupies a more limited position on this map today?
The number of people who speak foreign languages in Türkiye is relatively limited. Our education system is not currently capable of fully meeting these demands. There are difficulties in establishing contact with the West, and we must acknowledge this. Their greatest advantage, perhaps their most significant one, is national income. In Qatar, per capita income is around 135,000 dollars, whereas in Türkiye it is around 10,000 dollars. Under such conditions, competing with Qatar is not possible. Saudi Arabia also has extremely high national income levels. While they also have income disparities, their overall educational and economic structures are quite different from ours. They are, in my opinion, more advantaged. For this reason, Türkiye will likely continue within its own framework.
I have been writing this for twenty or thirty years: when you look at the global art map, you see Europe, then America, and suddenly after Vienna the map jumps directly to the Far East—China, South Korea, Japan. These regions integrated themselves with the West. Arabia has only recently emerged. Türkiye, twenty or thirty years ago, had the potential to become an art centre but did not receive sufficient support from either the state or the private sector.
“The World’s Largest Museum Could Have Been in Istanbul”
For example, Istanbul Modern was established around 2004–2006, which makes it a very new museum. A museum needs thirty to forty years to become widely recognised. Exhibitions must be organised, conferences must be held, and new generations must be educated—it is a long process. Türkiye should have advanced toward becoming a major centre, considering we have a century-long Republican history and an even longer Ottoman past. For centuries, diplomatic envoys travelled between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. However, the lack of artistic exchange from Europe due to religious reasons represents a significant loss. If those restrictions had not existed, works by Rembrandt, El Greco, or Van Gogh could have entered Türkiye. Perhaps today the world’s largest museum might have been located in Istanbul—but religious factors caused us to miss that opportunity.
How do you think this momentum might evolve over time?
Everything can change according to the course of the world. A new energy source could be discovered, creating a cheaper and more widespread system independent of oil and natural gas. In that case, these revenues might lose their importance.
Do you think it is sufficient to explain this artistic expansion solely through economic power? What other needs or motivations might be behind it?
Because wealth is not only about material possessions. The most valuable objects in the world are works of art—owning them, and owning museums. When you say, “I have a museum,” you are regarded as the wealthiest person, even if this does not necessarily have a direct monetary equivalent.
Think about Baron Heinrich von Thyssen or Nelson Rockefeller. The art collections they assembled could overshadow even the wealthiest business figures. One could say, “Come, let’s have tea at our museum,” and show them a Rembrandt or an El Greco—the other person would be overwhelmed. Gulf countries understand this very well and use it as a powerful instrument. They say, “We have a museum too.” They created Louvre Abu Dhabi from nothing. As long as wealth continues alongside culture and art, that is when you truly become the “wealthiest.”
