Slog Comments
A Freak Show Is A Freak Show Is A Freak Show: Art and Income Inequality
1
BARELY speaking to the point, but... does purchasing art at this level really have anything to do with this piece of art, or art itself? Museums are banks for these people, we could just as well be talking about some volatile money market product. Maybe this better explains why a fucking pastel version of the thing went so high. The only aspect the buyer likely cares about its the value.
I understand that, to people like Saltz, this is their entire world, so of course they'll have plenty to say on it, but it's almost a conversation better left to bankers and auction house proprietors (and anthropologists?) than anyone interested in art.
I understand that, to people like Saltz, this is their entire world, so of course they'll have plenty to say on it, but it's almost a conversation better left to bankers and auction house proprietors (and anthropologists?) than anyone interested in art.
2
this is why 'The Art World' is only interesting to the 1%. Otherwise, art (no caps) is interesting to many of the rest of us.
3
Gee...rich people pay for art and set the prices.
Like when has that ever happened.
Oh, yea...the friggin' RENAISSANCE !!
(Sidebar: Patent Violation. Stanley Kubrick invents Ipad 2!! )
Apple iPad in the 1968 classic: 2001 A SPACE ODYSSEY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ8pQVDya…
6
"The prices of "priceless" things are predicated on nothing but the ability of the extremely rich to pay them." Um, NO. The prices of "priceless" things are predicated on the consensus of perceived value over extended periods of time.
Comments (6) RSS