3 ms·
So, you're saying that "the value of art" is reducible to the economics of the price you can get someone to pay for it in a capitalistic marketplace? I'm sure
by Karellen 4y ago
So, you're saying that "the value of art" is reducible to the economics of the price you can get someone to pay for it in a capitalistic marketplace?
I'm sure glad that there was sufficient demand for the 10,000-year-old cave paintings we still have access to when they were first made, so that the original artists had an incentive to create them.
Truly, what makes them so valuable as works of art today, is the lack of supply of new ones.
- rcme 4y agoBy "value" I mean "the nebulous value we as a species derive from art" not necessarily economic value. Regarding cave paintings: You couldn't make new cave paintings even if you wanted to. We don't value the lines on the cave wall. We value the leap in human cognition. We value the evidence that humans advanced from the primitive animal mind to become an abstract thinker. And, based on how things have developed, I think we can conclude thinking symbolically and in the abstract was a pretty good idea! It's likely that contemporaries to cave painters had their minds absolutely blown by the first use of symbols. Cave paintings are high values now, but were probably also high value when they were created.
- Karellen 4y ago> By "value" I mean "the nebulous value we as a species derive from art" not necessarily economic value. Huh. Because "a pretty basic law of supply and demand" sure sounds to me like you were talking about the value of market economics 101, and not that other thing.
- rcme 4y agoSupply and demand applies to resources, in general, not just capital resources.