4 ms·

Unless I absolutely want to consume the art you make, why would I want to pay for it? I actually pay a lot for art every week. Most people do. It’s called musi

Unless I absolutely want to consume the art you make, why would I want to pay for it? I actually pay a lot for art every week. Most people do. It’s called music and movies. So the translation is, “everyone wants to make some random art but no one wants to pay for random unsolicited art.” Which seems fine by me!

notacoward 4y ago
> I actually pay a lot for art every week. Most people do. It’s called music and movies. How much of what you pay goes to the artists? If most of it goes to rentiers, then the artists themselves need other means of support so they can keep making art.
arrosenberg 4y ago
You are no different than people who hate paying for basic research because it doesn't directly put a new shiny in their pocket. Art is a societal process, not an individual act.
SMAAART 4y ago
Industrial Design and Graphic Design are also Arts, so we consume Art every day, most everything we use or buy start with Art.
- geoduck14 4y ago
  >we consume Art every day Food is an art, too. Good food is ... good
hoseja 4y ago
I don't think the OP is making a value statement, just an observation. It's perfectly OK nobody wants to pay for other people's random art, nonetheless most people still have at least some drive to create art.
ocimbote 4y ago
> Unless I absolutely want to consume the art you make, why would I want to pay for it? I understand that "if there's an act of buying, there's consumption" from your perspective, but I'd mostly disagree with that statement and actually, I think it's quite a narrow perspective. For every act of buying, there's an act of selling. But in the reality I see, many artists sell to produce rather than they produce to sell. So the act of selling is quite flawed from, say, a company selling its products, and the same is true for the act of buying: many don't buy to own or consume, but to support or for a naively genuine sense of beauty. You may very well boil it down to "money give, money take" but the symbolic here is far stronger than the capitalist perspective of art as a market. Also, I'm not ignoring the attraction of the market for artists and buyers alike, it's just not the whole story.
TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
Because the art industry isn't just "music and movies." It's an interrelated creativity hub. If you take away visual and experimental arts you also lose good music and movies. And good graphic design. And good architecture. And more. If you think this is exaggeration, consider that not a few household name musicians - Eno and a long list of others - went to art school, not music school.
- oblio 4y ago
  Who's Eno? This guy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eno_(rapper) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eno_(rapper) Seems like an obscure reference more than a household name :-) At least outside of DACH.
  - dls2016 4y ago
    I’m guessing Brian Eno.
  - coldtea 4y ago
    Brian Eno. Hardly an obscure reference.
    - oblio 4y ago
      > household name musicians He's not a "household name musician", either. Elvis, Beatles, Queen, Kanye West, Rihanna, Madonna, Beyoncé, Adele, etc are household name musicians. Brian Eno is maybe a strong influence in the field, but few regular people outside of actual musicians have heard of him around the world, I'd venture. I hadn't known about him before reading his Wikipedia page, just now. And I tend to read a lot :-)
      - HKH2 4y ago
        > He's not a "household name musician", either. How do we determine who is? Is Vangelis?
        4y ago
Wowfunhappy 4y ago
I haven't dug into the data, but I would assume working in the music or film industries would count as a "creative profession" (unless you work exclusively on the business side). While there can be a lot of money in those industries for the people who "make it", it's difficult to break in, precisely because there are fewer positions than people who want that type of work.

notacoward 4y ago

> I actually pay a lot for art every week. Most people do. It’s called music and movies. How much of what you pay goes to the artists? If most of it goes to rentiers, then the artists themselves need other means of support so they can keep making art.

arrosenberg 4y ago

You are no different than people who hate paying for basic research because it doesn't directly put a new shiny in their pocket. Art is a societal process, not an individual act.

SMAAART 4y ago

Industrial Design and Graphic Design are also Arts, so we consume Art every day, most everything we use or buy start with Art.

geoduck14 4y ago
>we consume Art every day Food is an art, too. Good food is ... good

hoseja 4y ago

I don't think the OP is making a value statement, just an observation. It's perfectly OK nobody wants to pay for other people's random art, nonetheless most people still have at least some drive to create art.

ocimbote 4y ago

> Unless I absolutely want to consume the art you make, why would I want to pay for it? I understand that "if there's an act of buying, there's consumption" from your perspective, but I'd mostly disagree with that statement and actually, I think it's quite a narrow perspective. For every act of buying, there's an act of selling. But in the reality I see, many artists sell to produce rather than they produce to sell. So the act of selling is quite flawed from, say, a company selling its products, and the same is true for the act of buying: many don't buy to own or consume, but to support or for a naively genuine sense of beauty. You may very well boil it down to "money give, money take" but the symbolic here is far stronger than the capitalist perspective of art as a market. Also, I'm not ignoring the attraction of the market for artists and buyers alike, it's just not the whole story.

TheOtherHobbes 4y ago

Because the art industry isn't just "music and movies." It's an interrelated creativity hub. If you take away visual and experimental arts you also lose good music and movies. And good graphic design. And good architecture. And more. If you think this is exaggeration, consider that not a few household name musicians - Eno and a long list of others - went to art school, not music school.

oblio 4y ago
Who's Eno? This guy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eno_(rapper) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eno_(rapper) Seems like an obscure reference more than a household name :-) At least outside of DACH.
- dls2016 4y ago
  I’m guessing Brian Eno.
- coldtea 4y ago
  Brian Eno. Hardly an obscure reference.
  - oblio 4y ago
    > household name musicians He's not a "household name musician", either. Elvis, Beatles, Queen, Kanye West, Rihanna, Madonna, Beyoncé, Adele, etc are household name musicians. Brian Eno is maybe a strong influence in the field, but few regular people outside of actual musicians have heard of him around the world, I'd venture. I hadn't known about him before reading his Wikipedia page, just now. And I tend to read a lot :-)
    - HKH2 4y ago
      > He's not a "household name musician", either. How do we determine who is? Is Vangelis?
      - 4y ago

Wowfunhappy 4y ago

I haven't dug into the data, but I would assume working in the music or film industries would count as a "creative profession" (unless you work exclusively on the business side). While there can be a lot of money in those industries for the people who "make it", it's difficult to break in, precisely because there are fewer positions than people who want that type of work.