Discrepancies in Sales of Art by Gender

I stumbled upon this ArtNews article announcing that the upcoming sale of artist Louise Bourgeois's 'Spider', a 24-foot long sculpture produced in 1997, could become one of the most expensive artworks by a female artist sold. The sculpture will be auctioned at Christie's in May and is expected to go for between $25 to $35 million.

At first, this excited me, as the value is both impressive and almost celebratory for female artists. However, I was then intrigued to consider what discrepancy might exist between the sale of works by male and female artists.

A simple Google search of 'most expensive artwork by a female artists' yields the answer of Georgia O'Keefe's 1932 painting Jimson Weed/White Flow No 1 which sold for $44.4 million in 2014. While I realize Wikipedia is perhaps not the most reliable source, this page actually provides a pretty comprehensive list of most expensive works (albeit, only paintings) ever sold. In the list of ~100 most expensive paintings ranked, O'Keefe's doesn't even make the cut; the list only includes male painters (for those curious, the most expensive painting is Da Vinci's Salvator Mundi, which sold for about $460 million in today's dollar).

What is the cause of the enormous discrepancy in cost between male and female artists? Is it simply a lack of recognition for women in the arts or a shorter history of women in the arts? While there's not necessarily one simple answer, it is a curious question to consider, along with ways in which female artists might become better recognized in the future.

Above Image: O'Keefe's Jimson Weed/White Flow No 1