Mercantilism has gone from the individual, the hand-crafted, the unique, to the anonymity of mass-production. However, the Brand of the style, fashion, and movement in the arts has been a long established trend. The collectors haven't changed--that is, they are still the wealthy--, they simply moved from behind the pulpit to the corporate desk. The most substantial change is definitely the rate of the style changes; it seems silly that anyone would cling to such an ephemeral "thing" so ardently.
To me, the more interesting discussion is the value, after the fact, that these objects can accrue. Even the name of the person who owned a painting, sculpture, tapestry, car, guitar, etc... for some odd reason drastically increases its value:
I, being no one of any importance, suffer massive injuries. I am wrapped in a cloth that happens to leave some trace impression of my body and/or face; the cloth remains intact through the years as my body decays. Years later, someone finds the cloth, and, for good reason, tosses the useless object. However, if my name were the almighty brand of Jesus Christ, the cloth would be a priceless treasure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8zf57tR7DU
(The narrator in this documentary is a bit annoying, but the point is reached.)
On the Matter of Public Space:
This reading seems to be a good junction to the Dave Hickey reading; that is (to reiterate one point of the article), this is where many artists must go when they do not meet the standards, or have not made a name for themselves inside of an establishment. Aside from this, public vs. private is a discussion you can have all day. Every situation is a balancing act between the public and private; the practice of being an artist is a balance between the private studio and the public arena of networking and exhibiting. However, it seems that it is the combination of the intimacy, the detached white-walls, and bureaucracy that makes the home/gallery setting all the more delicate.
No comments:
Post a Comment