The King has led national tributes to David Hockney, hailing the artist as a ‘giant of the art world’ and a quintessentially British visionary. While the monarchy may be constitutionally bound to neutrality, one cannot ignore the fiscal implications of such a cultural figure. Hockney’s works, from the sun-drenched pools of California to the Yorkshire landscapes, have long been a store of value for the wealthy.
Prices at auction have appreciated faster than a gilt-edged security, providing a hedge against inflation for those who can afford to hold. But the King’s praise raises a question: should public funds be used to subsidise art that only the privileged can buy? The market, not the state, is the best arbiter of value.
Let us celebrate Hockney’s genius, but let us not forget that art, like the economy, flourishes when left to its own devices.
