Unlike Sarah Thornton book, Thompson give information on how the art world became to be how it is and how the art market is strong today. but Sarah didn’t do that specifically she would bring up these points unless dissuading theses she interviewed, but she didn't dedicate a chapter like Thompson. I also like how he spent multiples chapter explains one part of the art work and broke it down like for the The Auction houses he different chapters explains, I admired how he diced his book into section it made it easier and clearer for those not familiar with the art world like myself. What I found as a weakness in this book was that he focuses on not the meaning of the art world like Sarah wanted to show the art world for its importance and culture and how each person views it almost in a moral way, where as Thompson would focus from too much from an economic view and on the growth of the art world as well as the impact each person would make like the wealth and repetition of the Auction houses and ranking and listing the top 12 dealers. I found this to be the weak point because explaining the impact a dealer has on an artist value is important and …show more content…
It’s about being rich, privileged, and powerful.” So she herself is embarrassed to be a buyer because sometimes there a stigma against buyers ad if they're buying art and not fully understanding the value of it, but only do so for the investment. While In Thompson takes about the power and immorally gained from buying and creating collection and having a gallery or museum wing. He mentions collector Mugrabi and his sons and one of his son said “you cannot have an impact buying one or to pictures pre artist we want inventory”, he goes on to say how this gives you staying power. so i really like how both these books resent both decision to buy art as an investment to gain money and power, but also the art culture and the genuine love and interest in