[ Home | Comment | Next | Previous | Up ]

Re: the fragile art market

Date: 01 Jul 2010
Time: 10:53:55 -0500


'demand have little to do with intrinsic quality' value in art is dependent on importance and that importance comes from important curators of important institutions. What we saw with Prince Charles recent architectural intervention is an example of that usually unspoken power to either give value or take it away. The question is, and the debate should be is that right ? Ive made a previous analogy with how a Ponzi scheme works and the use of affinity fraud - that a person of influence can persuade people to go along with a view or opinion and make a choice to give over money. Is the value in the art or in the influence ? http://www.flickr.com/photos/50515484@N05/4749252681/sizes/l/