"Postscript: This postscript is a question about the art market -- it has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with Artforum, its advertising, editorial policies or content. But consider this statistic, a telling one about the U.S. art world, taken from the pages of that magazine. Ten years ago today Artforum had a total of 112 pages. This month there are almost twice that many pages of ads, alone. There’s nothing wrong with advertising. I like ads. Ads are the porn of art magazines. They are the reason art magazines can afford to exist. This is NOT a call for fewer ads.
But you tell me what this much advertising means and how it may be affecting everything we do. Are we liking certain things because we know that other people are liking them? How is the market affecting the ways we see art? How does it affect the way curators and editors see art? Does the market create a competitive atmosphere that drives artists to produce better work or does it foster empty product? Do art fairs make artists make better, worse, or only more art? No one knows.
We don’t have a way to talk about the market. There is no effective 'Theory of the Market' that isn’t just a rehash of Marxist ideology. There’s no new philosophy to help us address the problem of the way the market is affecting the production and presentation of art, although people are trying. The good, maybe great news is that the market is unpredictable. Therefore it is a force of chaos, and chaos is always good for art. It’s just not clear yet how or even if this chaos is being used."
There must be more thoughtful consideration of the art market than he claims. I just I bet it's not in Artforum or the Village Voice.