4 ms·
Your explanation only makes sense if you base the value of the art on the experience of viewing it, or the intrinsic value. People like owning objects that hav
by Youden 5y ago
Your explanation only makes sense if you base the value of the art on the experience of viewing it, or the intrinsic value.
People like owning objects that have a history or story about them, like a ring worn by their great great grandmother, a medal earned by their grandfather for fighting in a war, or something their child made for them. These things have little to no intrinsic value, yet people can regard them as priceless because of the history surrounding the object.
The same can be true of paintings and other works of art. It's one thing to hang a thing on your wall that a world-famous master created and an entirely different thing for a copy made by a low-wage worker in Asia. Physically they could be identical but the history is different.
To get to NFTs specifically, I don't think an NFT as currently implemented captures this concept.
- musicale 5y agoPhysical artifacts do have historical value that may be hard to quantify. For example, you can examine the "real" Mona Lisa to find out interesting (and possibly novel) things about Leonardo's technique, brush strokes, materials, etc.. MRI or X-ray imaging might reveal the underpainting, layers, glazes, possible changes to the painting (either original or restorations), etc.. How much are first-hand information or insights into the painting, painter, or era "worth?" I have no idea. Though another painting by Leonardo would probably do as well, if you can find one. Failing that, another painting from the same era/locale would probably do, although they won't provide direct information about Leonardo himself.