The Mass Monetization of Art

Kenny Schachter writes in from London:

The backlash against art-o-nomics continues, with Felix Salmon of Reuters weighing in. I suggest all whiners (its practically it’s own movement by now) move to north korea and open an art cooperative. Imagine how long that would last before they either all killed themselves or started auctioning to Kim Jong-il.

“The shiny art selling for tens of millions of dollars is so dumb, and the caricatures who would emulate its success are so debased, that a lot of really talented artists and critics and curators and even collectors don’t even want in any more.”

Ha! Last I saw tons still want in, maybe that’s the problem why its escalating so much, too many want to play, and these days it’s the only game in town so why not. AND WHAT STUPIDITY AND IGNORANCE TO SPEAK ABOUT SHINY ART SELLING FOR MILLIONS WHEN A F*CKED UP SILKSCREEN ON PAPER AND SIMPLE BLACK AND WHITE PAINT ON CANVAS WERE AMONG THE CASUALITIES (i.e. the biggest earners in the multi-million’s madness).

Says Salmon: ”…the art market has stopped being a source of fascination and crazy numbers, and has started to be a source of sheer disgust.” For whom? Markets are by nature unfair and inefficient but there is yet a viable alternative. And who cares if some art sells obscenely?

Capitalism is well and good, but “let’s do it on a human scale.” Last I saw, it was humans in the drivers seat with extended paddles. Look, I understand that mass monetizing is sad when it results in art not looked at (stored in freeports), wine not drunk, houses not lived in and cars not driven, but there is plenty still to see, and often times for free.

Image: chris burden’s $1m of gold bricks is lunch money in today’s super fueled art world