Last Wednesday Phillips de Pury hosted a lively panel discussion to address contemporary art's ever-accelerating convergence with the fields of design, branding, and commerce--a phenomenon that has been raising provocative questions since the Pop era. Titled "De-Mystifying New Art Forms: Pixels, Plastic, Foam, & Spray-paint," the talk brought together Purple magazine editor Bill Powers, KidRobot founder and president Paul Budnitz, Tokion alumn Ken Miller, artist Christopher Brooks, and Phillips design specialist Meaghan Roddy. While ostensibly a discussion about new collectible categories like street art, photography, toys, and table settings, the dialogue really focused more on how value is created and how an object of pop culture emerges as an object d’art. (Conveniently, the talk also served to contextualize the works then on view at the auction house in anticipation of the Saturday@Phillips sale.)

Powers, the moderator, started the ball rolling by wondering whether newly-manufactured toys and commissioned graffiti works deserved to be given the rarefied label of "art" right off the bat. “Should there be a gestation period before which it can be called art, or should it be considered art immediately?” he asked.“How does intent factor into a piece of art?" Budnitz countered by celebrating the fact that the old order was breaking down, and that cultural production was just "just becoming more popular." As mass production enters the realm of fine art, Roddy said, designers have taken to creating “limited editions, "one-off" productions, and works with innovative materials to rarify certain collectibles. Budnitz--who declared that "commerce is my art form"--described arbitrary conditions he has implemented to create value, such as only selling some items on rainy days. Referring to Christopher Wool's line of skateboards, in which the artist uses an involved three-step procedure of heat-pressing silkscreens of spray-painted images to the boards, Powers mused whether using “applied process helped to make a work successful” in translating a mass-produced work into fine art.

Since partnerships between artists and corporations can be perilous for both sides, Budnitz said the question to keep in mind is whether "the artist is helping create the brand, or is the brand helping create the artist?” Furthermore, he said, “a successful partnership should not feel forced.” The panelists cited the Murakami-Vuitton handbag partnership as a success, and the McFetridge-Pepsi partnership a failure (for Pepsi). But the ultimate example of brand-artist fusion--and a prime candidate for overexposure--was agreed to be Shepard Fairey. “Fairey's mission is repetition, mass production and popularity,” said Budnipz, who expressed admiration for the artist's Obama poster as well as his success in profiting from the AP controversy. Miller went further, saying, “ Fairey wants to do the Nike Swoosh, but on independent terms”. He added “though I’ve gone back and forth on my feelings for Fairey's work, he now exists in a place beyond our criticism... he's there… we can no longer debate his cultural reference."

Click here to read our most recent story on Shepard Fairey's legal troubles

Panelists, from left to right: Bill Powers, Ken Miller, Christopher Brooks, Meaghan Roddy, and Paul Budnitz. ; By Valerie Garral