3 ms·

I'm not convinced, my friend. Much of the best art ever created is one of a kind. You can see pictures of it, or replicas of it, but the art itself is as rare a

I'm not convinced, my friend. Much of the best art ever created is one of a kind. You can see pictures of it, or replicas of it, but the art itself is as rare as it gets. Original creations are by definition must be created in the singular becore they can be distributed. Value, after that, is a strange and complicated thing when it comes to art, especially nowadays. As for promoting a more sophisticated consumption of art, what do you have in mind, and how could the Wu have contributed?

s0rce 13y ago
The live performances would still be "rare" just like a unique work of art. Recorded music is akin to a poster or a copy of a statue, it allows many more to benefit from the creativity of the creator instead of just a select privileged lucky few.
justinpombrio 13y ago
This reminds me of the HN discussion on Banksy [1]. Because he works in grafetti, his art is also ephemeral. (Until people decide to go out of their way to preserve it, that is; the same will probably happen here.) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6581899 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6581899
antiterra 13y ago
I didn't mean that good art can't be one of a kind. I meant that art as a whole isn't a rare resource. Also, what if the art is a photograph? As for art consumption, that's a big topic, but I wish we made an effort to find relevance to our own lives for something we learn or recognize in art. We do this relatively well for music. We recognize metaphors and themes for betrayal, redemption, and shame in songs. When it comes to visual art or literature, we become suspicious when someone suggests we could interpret someone's hair being dyed as a benediction. We worry about the artist's intent to show symbols, but barely recognize them if the intent is clear. The Syfy TV series "Caprica" had an unclothed woman suggestively holding an apple in its ads, but how many people consciously recognized it as biblical allegory? [1] http://www.impawards.com/tv/posters/caprica.jpg http://www.impawards.com/tv/posters/caprica.jpg

s0rce 13y ago

The live performances would still be "rare" just like a unique work of art. Recorded music is akin to a poster or a copy of a statue, it allows many more to benefit from the creativity of the creator instead of just a select privileged lucky few.

justinpombrio 13y ago

This reminds me of the HN discussion on Banksy [1]. Because he works in grafetti, his art is also ephemeral. (Until people decide to go out of their way to preserve it, that is; the same will probably happen here.) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6581899 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6581899

antiterra 13y ago

I didn't mean that good art can't be one of a kind. I meant that art as a whole isn't a rare resource. Also, what if the art is a photograph? As for art consumption, that's a big topic, but I wish we made an effort to find relevance to our own lives for something we learn or recognize in art. We do this relatively well for music. We recognize metaphors and themes for betrayal, redemption, and shame in songs. When it comes to visual art or literature, we become suspicious when someone suggests we could interpret someone's hair being dyed as a benediction. We worry about the artist's intent to show symbols, but barely recognize them if the intent is clear. The Syfy TV series "Caprica" had an unclothed woman suggestively holding an apple in its ads, but how many people consciously recognized it as biblical allegory? [1] http://www.impawards.com/tv/posters/caprica.jpg http://www.impawards.com/tv/posters/caprica.jpg