Sunday, September 24, 2017

Where the Wild Things Are: China’s Art Dreamers at the Guggenheim





Photo
From left, Kan Xuan, Yu Hong, Sun Yuan, Peng Yu and Qiu Zhijie are in the Guggenheim exhibition “Art and China After 1989: Theater of the World.” The backdrop is Qiu Zhijie’s ink-on-paper “Map of Theater of the World,” commissioned for the show. CreditGilles Sabrié for The New York Times
BEIJING — The signature work at “Art and China After 1989,” a highly anticipated show that takes over the Guggenheim on Oct. 6, is a simple table with a see-through dome shaped like the back of a tortoise. On the tabletop hundreds of insects and reptiles — gekkos, locusts, crickets, centipedes and cockroaches – mill about under the glow of an overhead lamp.
During the three-month exhibition some creatures will be devoured; others may die of fatigue. The big ones will survive. From time to time, a New York City pet shop will replenish the menagerie with new bugs.
In its strange way, the piece, called “Theater of the World,” created in 1993 by the conceptual artist Huang Yong Ping, perfectly captures the theme of the exhibition: China as a universe unto itself, forever evolving and changing into a new order. It also sums up a sense of oppression the artists felt from 1989 to 2008, as they were making these works.
Many of the more than 70 creators were born in China, yet like Mr. Huang — who fled the country in dismay after the 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy protesters on Tiananmen Square — they reject the label “Chinese.” One paradox: The artists appreciate the big splash on Fifth Avenue but express mixed feelings about a nation-themed show. Most consider themselves international artists who have contributed mightily to the global avant-garde art movement.
“Whether artists are Chinese or French is not important,” said Mr. Huang, who lives and works outside Paris. “I think the duty of the artist is to deconstruct the concept of nationality. There is going to be a day when there is no concept of nationality.”
Continue reading the main story
The curators have selected nearly 150 pieces of sometimes shocking, often scruffy experimental art — video, installation, photography, performance — that questions authority, and uses animals (on screen) to highlight the violence of humankind. (“Theater of the World” caused a stir in Vancouverin 2007 when Mr. Huang included scorpions and tarantulas; he withdrew the piece from the show there rather than comply with requests to remove those particular creatures.)
Photo
Huang Yong Ping’s “Theater of the World,” which features live insects and reptiles.CreditHuang Yong Ping/Guggenheim Abu Dhabi
The emphasis at the Guggenheim is on conceptual art. There are few oil paintings, and none of the flashy visages of big faces of the political pop school of the 1990s and early 2000s that fetched skyhigh prices at auction.
”We felt the whole concept of contemporary Chinese art needed to be exploded,” said Alexandra Munroe, the lead curator.
The chronology covers two distinct periods: the political repression after Tiananmen and the economic boom in the 2000s. In the aftermath of the protests, the government banned installation art. That provoked conceptual artists to stage furtive shows in anonymous apartments. Artists struggled. Many escaped abroad, came back, went out again. There were almost no galleries and little money to be made.
By 2001, when China joined the World Trade Organization, opening its doors to the global economy, the government understood that art could be China’s calling card. Money poured into places like the China Academy of Art in Hangzhou. Commercial galleries popped up in Beijing and Shanghai.
The 2008 Beijing Olympic Games were staged as China’s coming out party. Many artists dismissed the celebration, preferring to concentrate on government corruption and the demolition of charming old Beijing. But the Games did help to open the eyes of outsiders to China and its art scene.
Soon after the opening at the Guggenheim, the Communist Party will hold its national congress in Beijing, a conclave set to anoint the current president, Xi Jinping, for a second term. The uninhibited avant-garde art at the Guggenheim will offer a jagged contrast to Mr. Xi’s stiff internetcensorship, and repression of human rights that keeps some of China’s artists — including perhaps the best known, Ai Weiwei — from living and working in their homeland.
Photo
Sun Yuan and Peng Yu’s “Dogs That Cannot Touch Each Other,” a seven-minute video with eight American pit bulls on eight treadmills. CreditGalleria Continua, San Gimignano, Beijing, Les Moulins, Habana
Only nine female artists appear in the show, a poor representation that the curators say they are acutely aware of. One of the nine, though, is Xiao Lu, who achieved notoriety when she fired a pellet gun at a sculpture at a Beijing exhibition in 1989.
The few works by women is a reflection of the male-dominated government-run art academies of the period, Ms. Munroe said. The teachers were mostly men who wielded disproportionate influence with their power to dole out studio spaces, video equipment and paints. Most of the students were men. Now some classes are evenly split between men and women.
“That source of livelihood was closed to a privileged few, and the few were men exclusively,” Ms. Munroe said. “The good news is that it has changed.”
Some of the artists in Beijing and Hangzhou looked back at their work in the show, the atmosphere during those two decades and how they and the country have changed.

Peng Yu and Sun Yuan

They are known as the bad couple of China’s art. Peng Yu, 43, and Sun Yuan, 45, her husband, work in adjacent studios in Beijing’s thriving 798 Art District. Three heavy-duty motorcycles are parked outside Mr. Sun’s door. Inside, skeletons of a lion, a boar, a griffin and a few other animals decorate the shelves. Ms. Peng’s space is smaller, more spartan and contains a bare-bones kitchen.
In 2000, they attracted attention with a performance piece, “Body Link,” at a show in Shanghai. Both artists took part in a transfusion of their own blood into the corpse of Siamese twins. The piece was created just after they decided to get married and was “a special kind of coming together,” Ms. Peng said.
Photo
Xu Bing’s “A Case Study of Transference,” 1994. The artwork originally featured live pigs, their backs stamped with gibberish. The Guggenheim settled for a video of the Beijing performance. CreditXu Bing
Ms. Peng revels in her brazen politically incorrect attitudes. The fuss about too few female artists in the Guggenheim show was unjustified. “Personally I think female artists in China are not as hard-working as male artists and their art is not as good as male artists,” she said.
The couple’s work at the Guggenheim is one of their less radical pieces. The seven-minute video shows four pairs of American pit bulls tethered to eight wooden treadmills. The camera closes in on the animals as they face each other, running at high speed. The dogs are prevented from touching one another, a frustrating experience for animals trained to fight. The dogs get wearier and wearier, their muscles more and more prominent, and their mouths increasingly salivate.
The piece was first shown with the actual dogs appearing before an audience at the Today Museum in Beijing in 2003.
“The piece was so special, it stood out,” Ms. Peng said. “The art critics didn’t know what to say.”

Xu Bing

Xu Bing, 62, a small wiry figure with long black tangled hair and rimless glasses, is a veteran of China’s conceptual art movement. Early on, he showed that Chinese artists could be at least as provocative as their Western compatriots.
His work, “A Case Study of Transference,” from 1994 illustrates his fascination with the ugly and the primitive versus the beautiful and the classical.
Photo
Xu Bing gathered dust from the 9/11 site in Lower Manhattan for his 2004 artwork “Where Does the Dust Itself Collect?” CreditXu Bing
The original version of the work featured two live pigs — a boar and a sow — having sex in front of audiences at one of the early informal art spaces in Beijing. The backs of the pigs were stamped with gibberish composed from the Roman alphabet and invented Chinese characters.
The Guggenheim drew the line on live pigs in the museum, and settled for a video of the Beijing performance, said Philip Tinari, a guest curator, from the Ullens Center for Contemporary Art in Beijing.
Mr. Xu, who has lived in New York for nearly 20 years, spent time on pig farms during the Cultural Revolution. Why pigs and calligraphy? “Animals are completely uncivilized and Chinese characters are the expression of supreme civilization,” he said.
His second work in the show deals with 9/11. Mr. Xu lives in a townhouse in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, and when the planes hit the World Trade Center, he watched from across the river. A few days later, he went to City Hall and scooped up dust and packed it into a plastic bag.
On the eve of the Guggenheim show he plans to blow the dust from a leaf-catching machine into a small sealed room. The dust will fall on a stencil of a Zen Buddhist stanza.
Of all the artists in the show, Mr. Xu perhaps best straddles China and the West. He was a young teacher at the Art Academy in Beijing during the protests at Tiananmen. His students created the green foam and gypsum “Goddess of Democracy” that became the protest’s symbol for freedom.
Photo
Yu Hong’s “Witness to Growth” series, from 1999 to the present, juxtaposes historical images with self-portraits. Here, “Deng Xiaoping’s Tour in the South of China, ‘China Pictorial,’ P. 2, No. 6, 1992,” with “Twenty-Six Years Old, a Still of the Film ‘The Days,’” showing the artist snipping her hair.CreditYu Hong
“After June 1989, the cultural world became silent, everything became muted, my pieces were not allowed to be shown,” he said over Italian espresso brewed in his studio kitchen in Beijing. He fled in 1990. In the United States, the art schools welcomed him. He moved to New York in 1992 and in 1999 he won a MacArthur Fellowship.
“The relationship between China and the world has changed,” he said. “After 1989, artists stepped out into the world and they worshiped Western culture. Now younger artists want to stay more in China. They get more inspiration from China, there are more problems to explore.”

Yu Hong

When Yu Hong joined the Central Academy of Fine Arts in Beijing in 1984, she was 18 and the only woman among the dozen students in the entering class. It was after the upheaval of the Cultural Revolution, and the art schools were coming to life after years in the wilderness.
Ms. Yu, now one of China’s most esteemed realist painters, was an instant star. One of the first assignments for her class was to draw Michelangelo’s David. Ms. Yu’s rendition won first prize. It is still shown to students more than 20 years later.
Her oil painting in the Guggenheim show is entirely different. A self-portrait, the canvas shows Ms. Yu, a few years out of art school in the early 1990s, scissors in hand, snipping her own hair.
The back story is intriguing. Ms. Yu, and her husband, Liu Xiaodong, also an artist, were acting in a low budget movie, called “The Days,” about the couple’s true-life story as impoverished art teachers in a backwater province in northeast China. One of the scenes included Ms. Yu cutting her own hair. The movie was too bleak for the government censors and has never been officially released in China.
Photo
Zhang Peili’s video “Water: Standard Version from the ‘Cihai’ Dictionary,” 1991, depicts the absurdity of the state broadcaster never reporting Tiananmen Square protests.CreditZhang Peili/Guggenheim Abu Dhabi
The self-portrait is part of a historical series she began in 1999 called “Witness to Growth,” in which she paints herself at the various stages of China’s economic growth, juxtaposed against a photograph of the period.
The curators could have chosen a more dramatic work from Ms. Yu. A black and white self-portrait on the wall of her studio in Beijing shows Ms. Yu among the protesters near Tiananmen Square before the tanks rolled in. Adjacent to the canvas is a photograph of the crackdown’s aftermath. Dark smoke hangs over the square. The demonstrators’ tent city is demolished. Soldiers are on watch.
But such photographs are banned in China. A display of the photo overseas would almost certainly draw protests from the Chinese government.

Zhang Peili

A standout work by Zhang Peili, China’s first video artist, shows a female newscaster on China’s state television, CCTV, repeating a meaningless screed about water. The woman, Xing Zhibin, with bouffant hair, and an expressionless middle-aged face from the 1980s and 1990s, was China’s Walter Cronkite.
Mr. Zhang, 60, was shattered, he said, by the end of the democratic movement at Tiananmen Square. “That left a heavy influence on every Chinese person, and it lasts until today,” he said in his small apartment in Hangzhou.
He wanted to find a way to depict the absurdity of the state broadcaster never reporting the monumental event on the square.
Photo
Kan Xuan’s video “Kan Xuan! Ai!” catches glimpses of her running through a subway tunnel. CreditKan Xuan
A friend of the artist contacted Ms. Xing and suggested that she read the definition of water many times over.
“I lied and let my friend pass on the message that I was doing an education project about water,” he said. “I still don’t know if she knew that this video of her was actually used for a contemporary art piece.”
Mr. Zhang is one of the most influential art teachers in China. He detects less political restlessness among the new generation of students, who are impressed by the new consumer-driven economy.
Still, the huge gap between the rich and the not-so-rich in China is a recipe for future unrest, he said. But for the moment, he went on: “I procrastinate. Society is procrastinating. There is a lot to be done to change society but mostly we just skip it and wait.”

Kan Xuan

Visitors climb six flights of stairs to reach Kan Xuan’s studio overlooking the red tiled roof of Beijing’s ancient Confucius Temple. On a wooden table rests her laptop and a monitor. There is little art on the walls and no signs of her video works. “I like video because it disappears,” she said. “It doesn’t hang around.”
Ms. Kan’s two videos in the show are from 1999, and more personal in style than that of her mentor, Zhang Peili. The first, “Kan Xuan! Ai!” catches glimpses of her as she runs through a subway tunnel, weaving in and out among the commuters.
Photo
In Qiu Zhijie’s video “Assignment No.1: Copying the ‘Orchid Pavilion Preface’ 1000 Times,” 1990-1995, the artist nearly obliterates a classic calligraphy text.CreditQiu Zhijie
In the second piece, “Post-Sense Sensibility,” Ms. Kan surveys an underground art exhibition held in a basement on the outskirts of Beijing. The show was an exuberant, anything-goes outburst of installation art that surfaced after the sullen post-Tiananmen period.
Ms. Kan’s hand-held camera captures the outrageous art — pig intestines strung from the ceiling, a stillborn fetus lying next to a human face poking through a bed of ice. Art lovers crowd around the installations, hungry for a new era of unfettered expression.
The documentary is important for the sake of history, Ms. Kan, 45, said. But she long ago moved on.
Her more recent video work focuses on the tombs of Chinese emperors and their courtiers. She has traveled to the far reaches of China, often trekking up mountains to capture the emperors’ remains. “When I was traveling I told myself: ‘See what you see and feel what you feel.’ I have used simple techniques.”
Ms. Kan was one of four female artists for the 2007 Venice Biennale but she doesn’t care, she said, about gender politics. What’s more important, she pointed out, was to remain independent of the commercial galleries. Unable to survive on her creative videos, she has often taken jobs in high-end commercial film production, including filming luxury sports cars on treks from Beijing to northern Italy.
Even though her themes dwell on China, she considers herself an international artist and lives between Beijing and Amsterdam. “I only choose to be in shows where the curators and the artists work hard,” she said, “whether it’s Chinese artists or not.”

Qiu Zhijie

A vast multipaneled ink on paper map by Qiu Zhijie, one of the pioneers of China’s contemporary art world, is the only new work in the exhibition.
Over the years, Mr. Qiu has drawn outsized maps that combine fantasy with politics. The Guggenheim commissioned a map that juxtaposed Chinese and global events with the unfolding contemporary art scene in Beijing and Shanghai.
A master calligrapher, Mr. Qiu, 48, learned the discipline of painting characters as a child. His spidery writings, in English and Chinese characters, scrawl across the map that traces the torturous path from Mao to Xi Jinping. Some may see the work’s style as resembling Saul Steinberg’s maps for The New Yorker.
A figure who straddles the establishment and the fringes, Mr. Qiu works in a cavernous studio outside Beijing. He was still putting finishing touches to the map just weeks before the show’s opening. “Coca-Cola back to China, Star Wars, Ronald Reagan,” he said, reading out some of the early references.
The map seems politically safe: The Tiananmen Square crackdown is referred to as an “incident,” buried in small print. One milestone seems unintentionally pointed in its misspelling. “Reunifiction of HK” reads a phrase, a reference to the Chinese government’s plans for reunification of Hong Kong with the mainland. The banner “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” is strung across the top of the map, a motif that should please the government.
Mr. Qiu has been criticized in China’s social media for leading a government-run academy. “A lot of infuriated netizens say I am bribed by the government,” he said. “But if we didn’t teach in the art institutions how are the younger artists going to be trained?”
The variety and rebelliousness of the works from the ’90s and the early 2000s were long overdue for exposure at a mainstream Western museum, he said.
“The art I see here in Beijing is totally different to what I see in New York,” he said. “The big face school of painting gave a fake image of what Chinese art is. The Guggenheim will correct the image.”
Continue reading the main story

Beyond Supply and Demand: How Artworks are Priced





COLLECTING 101

Beyond Supply and Demand: How Artworks are Priced

Beyond Supply and Demand: How Artworks are Priced
"A Large Five Large" by Paul Rousso
The pricing of artworks is not a simple matter. And while the basic economic principles of supply and demand do still apply to the art market, the factors that contribute to an artist’s “supply,” or the availability of their art for sale, and an artist’s “demand,” or how many collectors are willing to buy their work and at what price, are quite complicated.
Artspace regularly publishes “Steal vs. Splurge” articles that compare exorbitant auction prices with artworks produced by artists that Artspace offers much more affordable alternatives for. In our latest edition, we found a 1990 lithograph by David Hockney that sold for $43,606 at auction, and a similar 1991 lithograph by David Hockney for $8,000,available on Artspace. How is that two prints by the same artist, from the same time period, differ by $35,000?
Here we breakdown the factors that contribute to an artist’s supply and demand, and thus the price of their artworks.


Primary Market vs. Secondary Market
Before we dig into how an artwork is priced, it's important to consider where it’s sold. Artworks are dealt on what are called the primary and secondary markets. The primary market refers to initial sales. An artist will make a work, consign it to a gallery, the gallery will sell it to a collector, and the gallery and artist will split the profit. And in some cases, the artist will sell to a collector directly from their studio, bypassing the gallery, at a lower price. These types of sales make up the primary market.
The secondary market, however, deals artworks that have already been sold on the primary market. If a collector has a work in their collection they’d like to offload, they’ll sell it on the secondary market, which is usually done via auction houses like Sotheby’s, Christie’s, or Phillips, or through the gallery where they initially purchased the work. In these cases, the artist receives no share in the profits.
Prices on the secondary market tend to be much higher than those on the primary market, mainly due to the fact that most artworks don’t accrue value over time significantly enough to justify a resale. Only works by historically significant, dead, or highly-demanded artists will sell on the secondary market. But within the secondary market, collectors can generally expect to find better deals at auction than from buying directly through galleries. 

Demand: Exhibition History, Institutional Support, Market Trends, and Commercial Viability
It should go without saying that the more people that want an artwork, the more the dealer can sell it for. “If there are two people that want the same object, then each person increases the threshold,” collector and dealer Stefan Simchowitz tells Artspace. This is pretty basic economics here—so maybe the more interesting question to ask is, What makes some artworks highly demanded and others not?
We asked Jonas Lund, an artist known for making work about the art market, this very question. “The more people that want it, the more people believe it’s a good investment, the more people think that the artist is going to become huge, the bigger the competition and the higher the price,” says Lund. In this game of speculation, several factors contribute to whether or not an artist is likely to “become huge”—perhaps the most important one being the artist’s exhibition history. 
A mid-career artist who is represented by a reputable gallery, has received a solo exhibition at a museum, and who has participated in institutional group shows or biennials, has better chances of “becoming huge” (and to demand high prices) than a recent MFA graduate who may just have one or two local group exhibitions at project spaces under their belt. Dealers and collectors look at an artist’s CV for information that could help predict the trajectory of their career; CVs include education, solo exhibitions, group exhibitions, artist residencies, awards, prizes, grants, fellowships, and inclusion in public/institutional collections.
Gallerists will often invite museum curators to see their shows in hopes of helping their artists become integrated into an institution’s program, thus ensuring the longevity and value of their career in the long term. "The art market really functions in a way where value is determined over long periods of time," says Simchowitz. "Whatever sort of valuation made based on a short time period can be quite volatile." Artists acquired by museums are considered "less volatile" since the longevity of their career is somewhat stabilized and validated by the institution. Not only do museum exhibitions help mid-career artists establish themselves, they also help raise the prices of secondary market sales, regardless of whether or not the artist is living. If an artist has a major retrospective or museum show, collectors will probably be willing to pay more at auction.
Now it’s important here to note the difference between price and value: an emerging artist may make art that is valuable in that it adds significantly to the trajectory of contemporary art—but it may not be monetarily valuable simply because the artist has not had the opportunity to show the work in spaces deemed worthy of the market’s attention. In an interview Artspace did with Chrissie Iles last month, the Whitney curator said, “I’m not against the market at all, but it’s important to remember that something is not necessarily historically significant just because it’s successful in the market.” So, you’re probably asking, how does an artist get to show in commercial galleries (and thus have access to collectors and have the opportunity to sell their work)? Why would galleries want to show them if they don’t make work that is “historically significant?”
Galleries come in all shapes and sizes, and while some of them are committed to showing artists who they believe are historically significant and will go down in art history as significant, others are more motivated to show art that is "commercially viable." Successful commercial dealers are able to spot young, emerging artists who are making artworks (usually paintings or two-dimensional works) that are congruent enough with current aesthetic trends to resonate with collectors in the know, but are unique enough to appeal to collectors looking for something that no one else has. A few years ago, neutral-colored abstract painting was hot; this year, colorful figurative painting is more in demand. 

Supply: Editions and Multiples vs. Originals, and an Artist’s Rate of Production
So, we’ve gone over how the demand for an artist’s work can be influenced by where they’ve shown, whether or not they’ve been included in institutional programing, and the commercial viability of their work. But how does supply effect price? To answer this question, it’s important to understand the role of the edition and multiple.
A "unique work" refers to an artwork there is only one of—a painting or a sculpture, for instance. An edition or multiple refers to an artwork like a print, photograph, or video, which has multiple copies of the same thing. This isn’t to say, though, that editioned prints or multiples are reproductions. “For one thing, let us say that although prints are multiples, they are, in fact, originals,” says Chris Santa Maria of Gemini G.E.L. at Joni Moisant Weyl. “It is something we try to make sure collectors understand, as prints are often thought of as reproductions of unique works, and they’re not.”
That being said, the prices of prints and multiples are often less than an artist’s unique works—not because they are less “valuable” culturally, but instead, because there are simply more of them to go around. “The motivation for artists to make fine art editions is as varied as the artist themselves, but generally making their work more affordable to a larger audience is part of their attraction to the possibilities of editions,” says Santa Maria. For collectors wanting to own a work by a particular artist, buying an editioned artwork can be much more accessible. “There naturally becomes a point where the price of an editioned print cannot approach the price of a unique work.”
But artists also have control over how much work they allow to leave the studio, in effect, regulating their supply. Highly prolific artists, like Damien Hirst and Pablo Picasso, says Simchowitz, will make 5,000 to 10,000 artworks over their lifetime. A painter like Julie Mehretu might only make a few paintings per year. So how much an artist produces and/or allows out of the studio can also have an effect on price.


Setting the Price: How Emerging Artists Enter the Market
Though there aren’t any hard-and-fast rules we can apply to art market pricing in general, it’s not too difficult to understand how prices reflect their maker’s career trajectory, or their position in the supply/demand matrix. But an even grayer area of this equation is in the emerging market, where artists who are just getting their first few solo shows need to figure out how to price their work before there is a demand for it. 
“When a gallery is introducing the work of an artist at an early career stage, one has to platform the work to a wide audience. This means setting prices at a lower price point,” says Agusto Abrizo of Van Doren Waxter, formerly 11Rand Eleven Rivington. Candice Madey of On Stellar Rays agrees: “I tend to err on the lower, more conservative side in order to start to sell. It’s very important that an artist young in their career is able to get their work out of the studio and into shows, homes, collections, and to build a following. Making the prices more attractive is helpful early on,” says Madey. 
So how low is “low” and how do dealers and artists know where to start? Determing the price of an artwork by an emeriging artist involves considering “a combonation of where they are in their careers, the nature and complexity of their work, and knowing the clientele well,” explains Madey. If the artist has worked with the gallery before, gallerists will “factor in what progress has been made since their last show, such as whether it was sold to museums, or whether the artist has had institutional visibility (solo shows, inclusion in visible group shows), and if we have built up a following of people waiting to see new works. Usually this is the case, and I can justify raising pries without disrupting their development,” says Madey.
But although this may seem like a bit of a crapshoot, the repercussions of over-valuing art can be severe. "I tend to err on the conservative side to protect the artists from downturns in the market," Madey tells Artspace. "It's always easy to jack the prices up in boom times, but never easy to lower them. It's very bad for the artists, and your clients, to over inflate prices.”

Other Factors: Size, Production Cost, Materials
So far we’ve talked a whole lot about the artist’s career, and not much about the actual work. Obviously dealers and appraisers need to take a hard look at what the thing their trying to sell actually is.
Larger artworks will sell for more than smaller, similar artworks by the same artist. And if the artwork was very expensive to produce, or required an inordinate amount of labor, these factors may also be reflected in the price. But production costs don’t necessarily have as big an influence over an artwork's price as one might think. Speaking specifically of prints and editions, Santa Maria of Gemini G.E.L. says, “When establishing the initial price, we take everything into consideration except, ironically, the cost to make it!” Though some artists and dealers will make this consideration, it’s not nearly as important as the artist’s previous sale and exhibition history.

So, there you have it. The moral of the story might be that there is no hard-lined rules when it comes to pricing art, but rather, a complex web of factors that require a whole lot of speculation, comparison, and informed guesswork.