As of spring 2026, the sales record^[1] for a living artist in Estonia belongs to Tiit Pääsuke (b. 1941) for his painting‑assemblage "Rahvariie III (Mustjala ainetel)" ("Folk Costume III (after Mustjala)", 1989, oil on canvas, 130x120 cm.

The starting price rose from €24,000 to €113,000^[2] during intense bidding at last year's Haus gallery spring auction (the final amount is subject to an additional hammer fee paid to the auction house for mediation). This year's spring auction season did not produce a competing result.

For comparison, the global price record for a living artist belongs to American Jasper Johns (b. 1930). His conceptual painting "Flag" (1958) sold in a private transaction for $110 million in 2010, which adjusts to roughly $162 million or €140 million when accounting for inflation^[3].

Does this incomparable comparison give us any meaningful insight? One parallel is that both works visually hint at national identity. That may be a coincidence. Just as one sales record can be easily explained, some factors influencing a price tag may be arbitrarily over‑ or underestimated. The art market looks rational on the surface, but emotional elements that seem irrational play a major role. This makes the art market an inexhaustible subject, because its nature includes a certain opacity — mystery, assumptions, myths, elitism — and a constant desire to understand how the market works.

The truth is that no one knows the exact size of the art market, in Estonia or anywhere else. Broadly speaking, the patterns and reasons are the same: in addition to companies that mediate art, works are sold directly from studios for cash or privately through online platforms such as Ebay, Etsy or Estonia's Osta.ee, where more than 4,000 items are currently listed under the art category.

This year's spring auction season

Several records were still set in Estonia this spring. The most notable was the highest price ever paid at a public auction for a work by a female artist. Malle Leis' painting "Sandra ja Château de Tarascon" (1983) sold at Allee gallery's auction for €100,000 — just €1,000 above the starting price. The previous record belonged to Aili Vint, whose work "Mägiaas udus" ("Mountain Meadow in Fog," 1978) sold for €65,000 at the 2024 spring auction. Both works are absolute gems in the artists' careers, so the sales were expected.

This year's spring auction season, however, showed signs of cooling activity. It is no longer a given that the sell‑through rate is around 70 percent. Two well‑known auction houses recorded sell‑through rates of just 34 percent and 52 percent, with most works selling at their starting prices. Meanwhile, auctions focused on young art have been much more successful by the same measures. Why? The answer may lie in lower and more attractive starting prices, as well as these platforms' ability to mobilize a new group of buyers who prefer works created in their own time.

Another trend this spring is that works by well‑known artists — such as Eduard Wiiralt, Peeter Mudist, Kaido Ole, Mari Kurismaa and others — are going unsold. This suggests collectors have calmed down and are waiting for standout masterpieces from familiar names rather than buying works simply because of the signature. Buyers are making more informed choices, likely reflecting increased art literacy. On the other hand, some works have unreasonably high starting prices that attract no bidders. Still, there is always a chance a work will find a buyer after the auction through a private offer.

Do art and money intersect?

Pääsuke's price record is not an anomaly in Estonia, because his works circulate in healthy quantities on the local art market, including auctions, where stable price growth has been visible over the past nine years.^[4] Although Pääsuke himself idealistically believes that "art and money do not intersect,"^[5] an active art market is still a compliment to the artist, showing that the artist's name has reached a wider audience and sparked individual buying interest.

Perhaps market feedback is not necessary for every artist, but more artists are expressing gratitude when their work reaches not only invaluable friends, supporters and exhibition visitors, but also buyers — and hopefully, eventually, collectors.

For example, members of the young painters' group Art!Šokk (which has no known connection to the Artishok blog or biennial) said at the opening of their first group exhibition this spring that without the "Buy Young Art" platform (an online auction run by Art & Tonic Gallery), they might have stopped painting. The annual boost — the possibility that someone might want to live with their works and consider them financially valuable — kept them going. One standout artist from the group is Henrik Hürden, now a freelance artist who makes a living from his work. One of his paintings reached a hammer price of €22,000 at Vernissage gallery's spring auction^[6].

So yes, the art market is indeed part of the art world, and in reality probably its most essential part, even if we are not always comfortable admitting it. A good colleague, gallerist Siim Raie, put it very aptly recently when he said the world does not know a single internationally successful self‑sustaining artist.^[7] In other words, every talented artist with the potential for international breakthrough reaches a moment when handling multiple tasks alone — exhibitions, communication, sales and more — becomes self‑sabotage. For galleries and art mediators to support an artist's career, it is crucial not only to sell the work but also to make sure the artist's work reaches a wider audience. It is a race against time, because here in Estonia we inevitably have to work harder to reach the center of the international art world.

Institutional promotion and exhibitions alone are not enough. Major institutions can focus on only a limited number of artists; not everyone gets the spotlight. And then there are passing "hot topics" — currently popular research themes such as women artists, artificial intelligence, body studies and so on — that naturally align better with some artists' work while leaving others out of the limelight. The emergence of a "name" in the art world is closely tied to market mechanisms.

A classic example is the comparison between Konrad Mägi (1878–1925) and Kristjan Raud (1865–1943). About half of Mägi's works are in private hands (and therefore potentially returning to the market someday) and half in institutions. By fortune, Mägi has also been in the focus of a passionate and wealthy collector (Enn Kunila), who actively promotes and researches his work and is deeply invested in making the artist widely known. In Raud's case, most of his works are held in institutions, so the popularization of his work has had to wait its turn, while the artist who is more visibly "in the picture" occupies the public's attention.

Every artist seems to have their moment — but that window can slip away if there are no curious eyes willing to take interest in the artist and their work. For example, Kaarel Kurismaa (b. 1939) and Anu Põder (1947–2013) — due to the timing of their careers and the nature of their installation‑based work — were not represented on the public art market. But their time came (Kurismaa received a Kumu retrospective in 2018 and Põder in 2017), and thanks to institutional interest and dedicated people, both artists now enjoy broader international attention. The fact that these two artists have not participated in auctions does not mean they stand apart from the art market or money. For instance, Temnikova & Kasela Gallery has presented Kurismaa's works at top‑tier art fairs such as Art Basel and Frieze London^[8].

Breaking important barriers

Since Estonia regained independence, it has often been said that the local art market is auction‑oriented. Recent developments, however, have shifted the balance. New representative galleries have emerged, there are more opportunities to buy art, and younger generations are more willing to share their work on social media. Recent years have also brought a growing awareness that owning original art at home is not just a privilege for the few.

Estonians' fondness for auctions is not hard to understand, because for first‑time art buyers the biggest barrier is fear — fear of whether the price of an artwork is truly objective. In auction logic, the price — not to be confused with value — is determined at the compromise point between two people. You need only two people who want the same work. In addition, auctions involve a kind of filtering process beforehand, when experts essentially validate the more valuable works, giving them a figurative golden sticker of high artistic value. The time pressure and entertainment aspect of auctions also help transactions happen more smoothly. Auction houses skillfully ease fears for both first‑time buyers and returning clients.

We are in a new era where money is discussed openly and everywhere. Investing has probably never been a more publicly dissected topic than it is now. We could add to this the wave of speculation accompanying the art market boom, with many enthusiastic statements about investing in art. A master's thesis on the profitability of art investments was even written at the University of Tartu's School of Economics^[9].

This spring's auction season, despite the records achieved, broadly shows that there are few speculators on the market — if any at all. These people are not speculators; they are passionate art lovers, and that passion is contagious. Yes, we do need role models. Just as in the late 1990s art buyers were mostly businessmen, today the biggest art lovers — not to say patrons — are individuals who have earned their free capital mainly through entrepreneurship. The major difference between the 1990s and today is that many current art lovers prefer living artists as their "trophy pieces."

While price records naturally attract more attention, the glow of prestige spreads across the art world more broadly. Real purchasing power and the sustainability of the art world lie in widespread interest in art, and that interest must be constantly encouraged. In Estonia's art market, the trend is clear — the more active participants there are, the more diverse new audiences emerge. A situation that benefits everyone.

***

^[1]The claim is based on public auction results, so private sales — whether through galleries or studios — cannot be included.
^[2] haus.ee, in Estonian.
^[3] Wikipedia.
^[4] The data comes from a database created by the author of this article and is based on public information.
^[5] err.ee (in Estonian). 
^[6] vernissage.ee (in Estonian).
^[7] Delfi (in Estonian).
^[8] temnikova.ee.
^[9] Riivo Anton. The Profitability of Art Investment in Estonia. Master's thesis.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!