3 ms·

I would like to hear the other side of the story. It is entirely possible that, in effect, the work is not likely to be valuable in the future and so he's gaini

I would like to hear the other side of the story. It is entirely possible that, in effect, the work is not likely to be valuable in the future and so he's gaining trust of those who do not understand the value of a piece and selling what will eventually be a worthless piece for inflated value. Honestly, I don't take pity in the games of the wealthy.

mc32 12y ago
That very well may be true, but in essence the values of lots of art are a product of the whims of curators, directors and art dealers. So those people who see their monopoly on power threatened probably would make a disingenuous stink about what he's doing. Basically he's sort of being the itunes/pandora/spotify/whatever to the radio DJ of old who could make or break a music artist. There may be a few pieces of art which are historically significant because of how they shape(d) future artists and appreciators of art --but those pieces are few and far between and moreover you don't see the same value assigned to similarly significant things in life but which aren't regarded art.