Art is commercial since the trade exists.
People desire beauty and have been creating artifacts since their existence.
Of course, art takes on different forms, but it is everywhere, and we admire, cherish and trade it.
One of the most striking examples of how commercial art can be is the stunt that Banksy performed, trying to trolls the commercial aspect of art…. And eventually it was trolled by the commercial aspect of art, when the value of his fragmented artwork was doubled.
The commercial side of art is also an art, or so it seems!
Banksy Shredded a Piece of Art That Sold for $1.4 Million.Now It’s Worth Double, according to an ART Expert
Help!! Make God’s name commercially!!! Then we are finally off of all at subsidiating that retarded nonsense that nobody is waiting for. People who want to fill electricity poles with bread and then dump into the sea and call that art. Damn it anyway with that crap.
If I am a tipper and there is no question for my work or even worse, I am untalented, then nobody hires me, and then I can not buy food, and then I go dead.But if I am an artist, and there is no question about the junk I read together or on my canvas, I ask for a subsidy for my studio and I can still eat a sandwich. Where is the righteousness there?
What is even more fragrant, I flans some gears, let that damn rusted, and say that it is called “opposition to Autocration and modern dictatorship”, and suddenly it is art…….Yeah hear……
Please, commercialize ALL art.Stop subsidies for film, music, visual arts, literature, everything.
I believe that art must be commercially correct.Rembrandt was mainly a portrait painter. Other painters filled castles or cathedrals with their art, not to mention the architects themselves.
Nowadays, it is said that an artist must be original and innovative, so judge the people who have learned and understand whether someone is original and innovative. But then those so-called originality and those so-called renewal have become new commercial demands.
Experts sometimes also have a hand to explain the difficult and ugly to art.But only when that difficult and ugly art sells is it really beautiful and original art, which we must find beautiful.
You may wonder if art does not have an inner value.The beauty, the questions it poses. No. The value of a work of art is determined solely by the price. Only when your paintings are sold well, Dumas for example, you are a great painter.
But is 40 million for a painting than not too much?I think so. 40 thousand per square meter would be a good maximum price, but if one pays 40 million for it, then it is also worth 40 million.
Some artists also cook with the Commercie.Then they say that their commercial works are a statement about consumer society. That they keep the people a mirror. (Hup, why no mirror in a gold list, for ten times the value of the gold used. A real Buisman! No, a real Buisman wants no one, you have to put yourself first as a well-known artist in the market and profile it properly)
Funny also how a work of art gets its value.In A gallery There is often a price, but that is not the value. The value gets it only when it is sold.
For someone personally, it may be an experience to see a certain piece of art, but that does not alter the value of that work of art.Only when it is massively admired, such as the Mona Lisa, behind bulletproof glass, a work of art gets real value and that real value, like everything in the economy, is purely economical. For the Mona Lisa is a good indication the cost for the insurance if you carry it.
Art is quite often just commercial.It is trade for art dealers and livelihoods for artists.
But it’s not always that simple.Sometimes art is not only art but also heritage. Heritage is what one inherits from ancestors. The importance of heritage is determined and borne by a society. Heritage is attributed to things that people appreciate, identify and want to keep. Especially identifying is a tricky one, because that shows that the term heritage is a political process.
Politics is the way in which the interests of groups and individuals are to be applied in a society, usually on the basis of negotiations.However, the latter does not always happen, and in particular not in heritage. Besides negotiating, violence and power are also forms. In particular within heritage, it is often a matter of exercising power. The fact that your group and your ideology have a heritage is an expression of that power. That could be a building that you can do-eigent and where you have your group of things animals or the appropriation of a painting in a museum.
If the ideology thinks that a communal or national interest is appropriate, it can sometimes be that the group thinks it may not be commercial.There is no doubt as to whether that is true in reality. Museums also lift entrance.
That is a good question to which I do not know the answer.Perhaps it has to do with it that art is considered something sublime?
Because it is no longer exclusive for many. And if something has become mainstream, it is not interesting for many.There are many reasons for this: it is no longer a good investment anymore because the more copies are of something, the lower is the value of the work.
Art is something that rich likes to unpack.Of course they want to be the only possessor.
Taste is obviously subjective, but let’s face it: in commercial art there is a lot of junk.