MA Alumna Lilly Dai on Connoisseurship, Context, and Career Growth

I wanted rigorous training that bridged scholarship and practice. Sotheby’s Institute offered direct access to objects, specialists, and market data, exactly the mix I needed to operate confidently across advising, collections management, and transactions.

The MA in Fine and Decorative Art and Design (now MA in Historic Art and Design) broadened my view of the art world as an interconnected system: scholarship, market incentives, conservation, law, logistics, and institutional frameworks all inform outcomes. That understanding continues to guide my decision-making.

Can you share how the MA program shaped your understanding of the art market?

Two things stood out. First, market structure: how information asymmetries, provenance, and timing affect price and risk. Second, due diligence as a process, not an event: condition, authorship, and comparables must be re-tested at each decision point. My research on fakes, forgeries, reproductions, and misunderstood objects drew directly on those foundations, combining connoisseurship with economic reasoning about incentives.

Beyond market structure and due diligence, the decisive influence was the way art history and design history were taught in an intertwined manner. Studying objects across periods and media—artworks, interiors, architecture, and applied arts—framed the market within a holistic view of world, art, and design history.

This sharpened connoisseurship (seeing how form, material, and technique travel across contexts) and clarified value drivers (why certain periods, makers, or movements command trust and price).

Risk assessment also became more rigorous: attribution, provenance, and condition are tested not only against stylistic comparanda but against the broader social, economic, and design currents that produced the work.

Crucially, the program centered connoisseurship—a skill too often overlooked today—through repeated comparative looking to build visual memory and distinguish workshop from follower or pastiche; hands-on study of objects in auctions and conservation labs to read materials and condition beyond photographs; and methodical exercises in blind attribution and reference-model comparison to separate observation from inference.

Writing catalog entries that clearly distinguish fact, opinion, and open questions reinforced documented judgment, while cross-disciplinary checks using design history and technical context improved authentication and pricing decisions.

This emphasis on disciplined looking, tested against evidence, is what I now apply daily in advising, valuation, negotiating, and in my work on fakes, forgeries, reproductions, and misunderstood objects.

What were the most valuable skills you gained during the program, and how do you apply them in your career?

I developed object literacy and connoisseurship by training the eye and testing observations against technical and documentary evidence. I mastered structured due diligence through building comprehensive checklists that address condition, attribution, title, authenticity risk, and market context. I also honed clear written analysis skills by cataloging and briefing clients with precision and without hyperbole.

I apply these daily when advising on acquisitions and sales, recataloging historic collections, or drafting client memos that separate fact from inference.

Can you describe your current role and how the knowledge or experiences from the MA program support your responsibilities?

I lead advisory work spanning collection strategy, acquisitions and sales, valuations, conservation and insurance planning, and the management of complex, multi-stakeholder projects. Alongside this, I direct a boutique consultancy and serve on a foundation’s board, where I oversee grantmaking and partnerships.

The MA continues to shape this work in tangible ways: disciplined connoisseurship and object literacy guide attribution, condition assessment, and pricing; structured due diligence ensures valuations and transaction memos are defensible; and clear, precise writing keeps catalog entries and client briefs focused on facts rather than conjecture.

Training in negotiation and ethics fostered a risk-aware approach to counterparties and warranties, while exposure to institutional standards strengthened my ability to design audit-ready processes for conservation, insurance, transport, and lending.

Integrating art and design history with economic context sharpened decision-making on acquisitions, deaccessions, and collection narratives, bringing depth and rigor to every aspect of advisory practice.

Using works of art as case studies is a hallmark of the program. How do you feel this method helps students develop critical thinking or connoisseurship skills?

Using real works of art turns looking into a disciplined method rather than intuition. Students build judgment through comparative looking, hypothesis testing, and reference-model analysis, integrating art and design history with technical checks to confirm or challenge the eye.

Structured writing, ethical practice, and peer critique reinforce professional habits, while case studies including problematic objects sharpen detection and connect quality to market realities.

This combination is what turns looking into connoisseurship and connoisseurship into better market decisions.

What has been the lasting value of the program for you—whether in terms of professional opportunities, intellectual growth, or personal perspective?

Professionally, the program gave me a defensible, repeatable framework for valuations and transactions, starting with connoisseurship, then technical and documentary checks, and finally price. Seminar concepts became practical checklists for attribution risk, condition, comparables, and negotiation, reducing errors and saving time. I also gained sharper risk pricing skills and a network of specialists who challenge assumptions and accelerate research.

I now approach connoisseurship methodically, using structured comparisons and explicit caveats. Integrating art and design history deepened my understanding of how technique and trade shape objects beyond market narratives. The discipline of separating fact from inference improved my writing and cataloging, while ongoing research continues to refine my framework for authenticity and attribution.

The program strengthened my judgment under uncertainty, making me comfortable with saying “I don’t know yet” and planning next steps. It taught resilience and prioritization under heavy workloads, and embedded ethics as daily practice through clear disclosure and audit-ready documentation.

In short, it gave me a portable toolkit that supports reliable outcomes in a confidence-driven market.

What advice or tips would you give to Sotheby’s Institute applicants?

Arrive with a clear focus and know the questions you want to answer, mine were about authentication, risk, and market structure. Build your own due-diligence toolkit by turning seminar insights into repeatable checklists. Write plainly, because clients and curators value accuracy over adjectives.

Take full advantage of London as you see objects constantly, compare, take notes, and test your hypotheses against experts. Finally, network with intent, cultivating relationships you can rely on when negotiating, lending, or troubleshooting a project.