I’m a fan of list-making, and most of the people within the artwork world should not, as a result of this can be a area, in spite of everything, the place that type of writing is taken into account déclassé at finest. And so, once I introduced the concept to rank the perfect 100 artworks of the twenty first century to a gathering of ARTnews and Artwork in America editors final fall, I anticipated that everybody would contemplate the idea gauche. That wasn’t what occurred: the editors enthusiastically supported the concept of such an inventory. However this, it turned out, was one of many final issues we’d instantly agree upon.
Within the ensuing months, we traded Phrase docs, spreadsheets, and Slack messages stuffed with concepts for what ought to go on the checklist. There was little overlap amongst our options, and there have been loads of works to sift by. We spent hours debating which artworks to even contemplate as a gaggle, calling on editors to defend their proposed items earlier than these assembled.
If the argument was compelling, the work was moved onward. If it wasn’t, that work was tossed out of consideration. It was robust going for some actually nice artwork, and it was a course of that generated no small diploma of collegiate discord. (I’m nonetheless embittered over being disallowed from itemizing a portray by Michel Majerus—I do know I’m proper and my colleagues are mistaken, however I say that with love.)
We set down some standards to restrict ourselves. Just one piece per artist was allowed to be listed, and the artworks reviewed needed to be produced between 2000 and now—apart from one piece that made our checklist, Walid Raad’s Atlas Group challenge, whose relationship regularly adjustments as a part of its genius conceit. The artworks needed to converse to one thing, whether or not it was an off-the-cuff motion or an inclination that was within the air, they usually needed to emblematize a sensibility that was distinctly of this century. We did our greatest to concentrate on particular person artworks that stood on their very own, within the absence of different associated items, which meant that some really nice artists wouldn’t determine right here. And we decided that the works thought of needn’t be influential and even extensively seen—they merely needed to be high-quality.
Up to now, so easy. However we shortly realized there have been issues: some works functioned finest in sequence, which appeared to preclude their being listed as discrete items. Furthermore, some works belonged to initiatives or sequence begun within the Nineties, earlier than the beginning of our purview, and that raised questions on their inclusion. And the way finest to be world? We’re New York–primarily based journalists with out journey budgets, in spite of everything.
In the long run, we determined to rely on what we all know finest: the objects that we noticed firsthand. Meaning our checklist is extremely subjective and under no circumstances all-encompassing. One other publication’s checklist—that of, say, a Berlin-based journal, and even one other New York–primarily based journal—may look fully totally different. We thought this was completely acceptable.
Our checklist supplies solely a partial view of latest artwork historical past. The place, you may ask, is relational aesthetics? Not right here, for probably the most half, save for one memorable Tino Sehgal efficiency. What about zombie formalism and the latest figuration craze? Additionally not right here, principally. And what about famed artworks like Damien Hirst’s bejeweled cranium and Anne Imhof’s efficiency for the 2017 German Pavilion on the Venice Biennale? Absent as properly—we determined they weren’t for us.
However we weren’t making an attempt to place ahead each notable paintings made since 2000, since that may require a a lot bigger checklist. And in addition to, the artwork world has grown too massive for one editorial group to see the whole lot. That will not be such a foul factor.
Right here’s a thought experiment: Think about you might be an editor at ARTnews 75 years in the past, in 1950, and say you need to tackle the identical challenge. You’ll have a a lot simpler time nailing down the 100 finest works of the twentieth century thus far as a result of there was an excellent probability they had been exhibited in New York, Paris, or London, and had been doubtless by an artist primarily based in a type of cities. You’ll haven’t any downside choosing out the nice works—there could be no query about rating Jackson Pollock’s Autumn Rhythm (Quantity 30) extremely, even when that portray was made that very 12 months—and also you’d know precisely which modernist actions you wanted to replicate.
In 1950, the artwork world was small. However in 2025, that’s now not the case. Artists are primarily based all all over the world, in locales starting from Buenos Aires to Beirut, and biennials have come to replicate the breadth of at this time’s artwork scene, with the latest editions of Documenta and the Venice Biennale each largely centered on the World South, an exceedingly giant swath of the world that has traditionally been stored out of our Eurocentric canon. To see the whole lot is now tough, if not outright unfeasible; to create a 100-work checklist that displays all of it is rattling close to not possible.
Maybe we are going to look upon our checklist in 2050 with embarrassment, cringing over how a lot nice artwork we failed to note. Or possibly our future selves shall be content material with what we did handle to seize about artwork within the twenty first century.
Both approach, the very fact is that this: we’re sure to miss one thing, and that—for my part, anyway—is kind of alright. The quantity of noteworthy artwork is bigger than ever earlier than, and our checklist, even at a monumental 100 works, with some 15,000 phrases of copy to accompany them, seems puny compared. Right here’s to studying about all the nice artwork we missed within the years to return.
