Art is nothing but benjamin's?

Once again the Art and Artists group on Flickr has been garnering some great topics. This paticular group is always ready for a great debate. Today I've started a new topic based on a comment from another member who stated that "Art is nothing more than Money" and here is my response.

As the rantingsmith pointed out in the modern art thread, this comment is indeed a broad generalization. However, more than that it is an inaccurate generalization. All art is NOT producing vast sums of money, in fact most art produces very little to no money. When you consider that there are hundreds of thousands of artists worldwide creating pieces that never see the inside of a gallery you have to wonder why are they creating these pieces? Why are they wasting their time and sticking with these non-lucrative artistic endeavors? Maybe it’s because art is MUCH MORE than money.

When we focus on the monetary aspects of both art that has been produced in the past, and work currently being marketed, we loose our ability to see clearly. Personally, I could give a blankity blank, who or what medium critics and galleries deem as important or valuable. If I like it, then I like it, if not who cares. And if I had millions of dollars in the bank, and I saw a piece that I liked, the price tag would be of little importance to me.You also said that the defining parameter between "Professional Artist" and “Amateur” is "Are you being paid?" Who cares about this label? Not only is it inconsequential, but it’s not always the case. I happen to know many very talented and serious artists who are not getting paid. Does this mean that they are amateurs? Hardly. Professional, mediocre, amateur, none of these are significant, unless of course you have a narrow view about what it is that art and artists really are. An artist creates, regardless of whether or not you like it, whether or not they make any money from it, or if they are recognized as a quote Professional.

I also want to touch on the extraordinary prices that some, if not most, of the artwork from the past brings. Work from the past needs it’s own category of consideration. When we see the money these pieces bring at high dollar auctions we need to recognize that it isn’t just the artwork itself that garners these bids. I say this because these pieces have a special intrinsic value due to their age, their historical context, their condition (especially pieces made before 1900), and of their subject, medium, etc. I’ve worked in the antiques business for more than thirteen years and let me tell yah, you develop an appreciation for early works of art, it is unavoidable.

Consider this: If I paint a basket of strawberries spilling out onto a simple wooden table it might be attractive but it won’t be nearly as well received as the c.1850’s oil painting depicting a basket of strawberries spilling onto the table. The value is intrinsic. Is that some horrible conspiracy? I think not. I think it’s as simple as having an appreciation for antiquity and its inherent connection to supply and demand.

I also want to reiterate a point I made in a previous thread about making money off the work you produce. Maybe I’ll be a bit more blunt this time. Anyone who pretends to not harbor a desire, or fantasy, or dream, no matter how fleeting or inconsequential, to someday make money or to be recognized as a talented or desirable artist is a liar. Sorry folks. Let me clarify that I don’t mean to imply that all artists are only working only FOR money, because that is an obvious inaccurate statement. What I am saying though, is that we all want our work to be appreciated as much as we ourselves appreciate it. If we are fortunate enough to actually make money off of our work then GREAT! What the hell’s wrong with that. Damn I hate the all-virtuous, loner, pay no attention to me, façade that so many people adopt. If this idea of introversion were accurate than the pools of flickrs art groups would be completely empty.

I also know this to be true because I spent a good nine or so years claiming that I didn’t care what people thought about my work because I was only doing it for myself. Granted there is a certain degree of truth to this statement, in that it is not my goal to please others with the work I produce, but it is equally true that my former subconscious fear of rejection was a powerful tool that prevented me from bringing my work out into the open. Once I did and I received positive responses which landed me representation with an important gallery, I recognized the power that our fears, conscious or not, have over us. I’m making money from my work, not much, I surely won’t buy an island or anything, but damn it feels good to know that someone I don’t know personally, pulled out their checkbook and bought a piece of my interpretation of life. Pardon me if I don’t see the negative attachment to this concept.

Every artist, even the ones making money are trying to express something, or at the very least relieve some creative aspect of their personality. If you pour yourself into your work, heart, body, soul, blood, tears, and so on, and you become recognized for this then that is just another aspect of your work, and I say Congratulations!