...
In the current art market, branding and prestige have become predominant markers of wealth and status among the cultural consumers and producers. As it happens, the more famous you are, the more trusted you are, the more recognized you are, the more money you make and the bigger impact you have on society. Guggenheim would thus seem like the perfect franchise! It is a large and globally respected institution that has flourished in New York City and indeed in installments all over the world. Yet this branding is not the same as the branding of an artist or an art fair. The Guggenheim has taken it to a whole different level and there could eventually be negative fall out from this. An artist's work is branded because it is made by them. An art fair is branded because people go there to see the best. The Guggenheim is branded for its unique perspective on contemporary art and its respected reputation in the art community. Unfortunately, no artist would ever attempt to clone themselves. By proliferating its physical establishments around the world, the Guggenheim runs the risk of weakening its strong standing as an art community staple. For one, they expose their true motives for money, which is generally frowned upon in the art world. They remove themselves from the roster of pure, art supporting institutions around the globe. Further, they run the risk that the downfall of anyone of the other Guggenheims, a scandal or a misfortune befalling any of the franchises, could dramatically impact the importance and appeal of all of the other museums. When the Guggenheim multiplies itself, it makes itself available to a wider audience, yes. But it also makes the experience of going there less unique, less desirable, and less authentic. The store runs the risk of becoming a glorified McDonalds... McDonalds… a cookie cutter institution which can be found in any city and which loses its main appeal as a foundation of the art scene.
...