How do we derive value for a work of art?
Monetary value
Meaning value
Pattern in these inquiries:
Understanding how the question and supposed answers are built rather than chiseling out one defined answer.
The question is always: when considering such a question, what can be taken into account, and how so?
This show is like interpreting maps and discussing the terrains of a region. The inquiries being regions.
How do we declare that art has value?
Two value systems are proposed for the purposes of illustration: classical period and post-classical period in terms of value systems
Why do we make a dividing line in the history of art which we call “modern” art?
Is it a distinct line or a period of transition?
Stylistic concerns, representational approaches, conceptual work
Modern art can mean many things: in addition to the above, it can be about when the artists are the ones steering and deciding the subject matter, scale, format, etc, of art.
Difference: artist is now deciding what the subject matter is.
When painting was the only way to make large color pictures.
The older value system: resembles valuing approaches that we still use today.
This involves recognizable and externalized things that have value that have nothing to do with expectations and not stylistics and can be easily understood in terms of time.
Work as certain levels of precision, volume, time where none of it is variable in terms of voice or style. This classical system of valuing is clear cut and has been around a long time. It was at play in the art world for a long time.
Side road: the lens from now applied to then.
Once artists define the subject, they begin to steer the stylistic approach. The subject matter and the style are now within the artist’s control.
What are the parameters of the question? What does it mean to pose the question?
Is modern art more about stylistic or subject matter declaration?
It need not be “more about,” but intentionally pitting them against positions the inquiry.
Post classical value system doesn’t play by rules that can be clarified at all times. It could be about sentiment, or about who else thinks it has value. It might be worth something because of reasons beyond what can be understood systematically and consistently.
Post classical model of valuing art doesn’t have an outside visible hallmark to it. The foundation of this system is originally steered by there not being an outside valuing system in the first place. It doesn’t have an architecture to it.
Is the valuing of meaning separate or different from monetary value in terms of art?
In the classic value system? In the post-classic system?
Is there a clear articulation to the reasoning of a meaning valuing system?