Museums and the hype around NFTs

I have been thinking about this article for some time as I observed the ways and means by which museums have jumped on the hype bandwagon for NFTs. Some of this has probably been influenced by circumstances, particularly the hard-hit revenue streams due to the COVID-19 pandemic. I don’t think the situation has completely calmed down yet, but certainly enough has happened to reflect on where the NFT movement might be heading. Trends are definitely taking shape. The possibilities are much less understood at this time.

The obvious question: what is an NFT?

Simply put, Non Fungible Tokens (NFTs) are digital assets validated through blockchain technology. What makes them different from any other digital asset is validation and traceability. This, too, makes the sale and resale of NFTs possible. In fact, the ability to monetize NFTs has made them very popular among creatives, particularly digital artists. In fact, NFTs can secure royalties like no other transaction in the art world.

Paradoxically, NFTs were the case study the blockchain desperately needed to make it understandable and to fully understand and endorse its potential application. Such understanding can only be gained through the lens of monetization.

So where do museums stand with respect to NFTs?

Museums have slowly crept in, sensing the potential to explore and exploit. However, these museums are still few in number, although interest is steadily increasing. Some have ventured much further, though still cautious and much less innovative than one would expect. There is much to discuss and reflect on.

I choose to make one observation in particular.

The use of NFTs is still limiting-we have barely scratched the surface. Alot of experimentation is still going on, but they also need to examine how NFTs will fit into the larger picture of museum business.

Let’s take this one step further. What most museums that have experimented with NFTs have done so far is replicate masterpieces in their collection as digital twins. Some have described them as digital works of art (DOWs). There is certainly much more that can be done and my forthcoming articles will explore this topic further. What is also striking is the fact that this happened in the span of less than a year. NFTs of well-known masterpieces have been minted by the Uffizi, particularly Michelangelo’s Tondo Doni in May 2021 with Cinello, the strategic partner behind this project, claiming to breathe new life into the masterpiece. In July, the Hermitage followed suit, coining works by Leonardo, Van Gogh and Monet. Almost concurrently with the Hermitage, the Whitworth Art Gallery in Manchester minted its NFT of William Blake, this time with a long-term commitment to an exhibition on the economics of art. The list is sure to grow to include others who have continued to join the fray since last August and continued to do so by the end of the year. An exhibition of NFT digital artworks (identified as DAWs) of masterpieces from four Italian institutions will soon be mounted in London. There is more to mention and report in what is increasingly looking like a phenomenon that has yet to be properly documented.

What museums have experimented with so far can be compared to limited edition reprints of a physical original. The medium is, indeed, different, but the concept and process are very similar. In effect, an original is replicated in a relatively secure and traceable way, and a physical original is replicated securely in DAW format. The argument advanced is that thanks to NFTs, works of art are finally dematerialized but the relationship between the physical original and its digital twin, validated and quantified, remains intact.

There is a paradox in this immediate interest in NFTs demonstrated by museums in just a few months. It has been years since museums have consistently advocated an open access policy for digitized content in their collections, and in most cases, free access goes beyond use and purpose, with no distinction between commercial and noncommercial use. The National Gallery of Art in Washington, for example, states this very clearly on its website, “images of these works are available for free download for any use, commercial or non-commercial.” The Smithsonian released 2.8 million images in February 2020, just before the COVID-19 pandemic struck, announcing that “our goal for Smithsonian Open Access is to make the nation’s collection available to people around the world for any purpose... ”. Many other U.S. museums have joined the fray for some years now, not least their European counterparts who in due course embrace the principles of open access museums. Creative Commons Zero has been increasingly used by museums as a guarantee that users can “reliably and without fear of subsequent claims of infringement construct, modify, incorporate into other works, reuse and redistribute as freely as possible in any form and for any purpose, including, but not limited to, commercial purposes.”

The shift towardopen access, particularly with regard to works of art in the public domain, goes against the principles of scarcity that inform the production and minting of NFT, particularly by open access museums. Indeed, technically there would be no difference between an NFT minted by a museum and one minted by an art gallery or private individual. Does this automatically and unequivocally imply that anyone, anywhere can coin as DAW NFT artworks in museums whose collections are open access?

It seems that museum-industry collaborations may be a partial solution to this museographic impasse. A good example of what this compromise might look like is the French startup LaCollection. The introduction available on their website describes it as “a community of people passionate about art, culture and NFT.” The approach they claim is to “work with the world’s most renowned museums, galleries and contemporary artists to offer a curated selection of NFT.” TheBritish Museum’s membership in this project further validates the platform, including through the sustainable use of NFTs.

This could very well be the case for a partnership of convenience, as those museums that have the resources to coin NFTs are very few despite the enthusiasm around NFTs showing no signs of abating. Experimentation is set to continue in earnest. Most of this excitement is still within expert circles. Most museums are still adamant, perhaps because of perceived risks also due to lack of knowledge. Some are still not cashing in on NFTs, perhaps because of uncertainty about what these tokens can do for an art museum’s primary goals. Others think that selling NFTs of original artworks might be demeaning.

NFTs are certainly not yet mainstream, but what could make them much more widespread may have to do with their usefulness and unique character.

Article originally published in English on The Humanist Museum blog.