I am despondent.
There's a lot of talk about art as an "investment". Isn't the concept of profits at any cost at odds with the artistic spirit, as the worst trash art can outperform masterworks if marketed successfully?
Art has been part of human culture as long as we have records of society and until very recently (1800 or so) in Western societies it has always been a commercial product. Even in most indigenous cultures, artmaking was a status marker and often created in exchange for position and esteem.The idea of making art purely for “artistic spirit” and “self expression” is a phenomenon promulgated by philosophers and espoused first by hobby artists in the 19th century. It was then picked up by other avant-garde artists and has been carried forward largely through the efforts of academia (many of whose members are not financially successful artists).
It’s a silly and illogical belief system, if you think about it at all. I mean, it’s fine if you’re merely painting as a hobby. But who in the world makes ANY kind of product without consideration for its end user and expects to be successful?
And that is especially true for art, whether painting, sculpture, music, writing or theater. These are all forms of communication . They require an audience for their existence. Art marketing is an intrinsic part of art, and always has been. As I like to remind people, the Sistine Chapel and pretty much every other famed artwork in history was a commission made for hire and the artists marketed themselves assiduously to get those commissions.
As far as your remark about “trash art”? There are no consistent standards for judging art. “Masterworks”? Museums are filled with mediocre art by famous names. Can you tell the difference? Most people cannot. And actually, this is a good thing. It’s right that your trash should be someone else’s treasure. These opinions are a very personal matter - and should remain that way.
Last point - Art is a terrible investment - unpredictable, a nontransparent market. unadvisable at best. People do it because it’s glamorous. But only art at the multi-million dollar level makes sense. Anything else is a crapshoot. Stick to stocks and real estate.
Thanks for the compliment of the A2A
So this ******* basically claims art is smoke and mirrors.
And people have been sold ****ing pet rocks.
I've had the sinking suspicion the art industry was infested with hucksters selling snake oil to a gullible public, and this reply comfirm it.
The real artists are no match for the marketing assholes.