By useename
“FAS Identity” by Musa WorkLab is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
A true artist shouldn’t think about money at all. A true artist should sacrifice everything for the art, even if that mean to starve for it. True value in the arts isn’t supposed to come from money or commercial status. The real value is the artworks symbolic meaning. This type of thinking is said to be popular amongst many artists and critics.
Bourdieu talked about social fields of power and denial of monetary value. About how the art market wants to keep their autonomy, by resisting economic values. By doing this artists generate symbolic power, which is the most valuable to them.
Nico Widerberg is an artist that makes a good amount of money by selling his art. He says that if you’re going to have the energy to make art, you need to have a commercial part you can sell. Every artist has costs they need to cover in their work, and the only way to have financial freedom is by selling. However, he says that if you are such an artist that sells too well and get too successful, some people will call you a sellout. That you are too concerned with making money than actually making true art.
“Money Tree” by O Silva is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Maybe those who emphasize the symbolic value to such an extent are artists who doesn’t have particular commercial success, and therefore doesn’t want to acknowledge this as value. What type of value that matters to each individual artist may depend on which market that artist wants to get into. Monetary value is important for those in the commercial field, social values are important in the inclusive field, and cultural/symbolic value is important for the exclusive field. The last one is typical for those who make art for art’s sake. They feel that art has a value in itself, and isn’t supposed to be useful.
Nico Widerberg says that when he makes art that people want to buy, he feels that it’s a vote of confidence in him. Many artists that lives by the idea of denying monetary value, has to have a job on the side. Widerberg doesn’t want to live this way, because he feels that as an artist you then only get to make your art halfway and not the way one should. He says that of course everyone can’t live of only their art, but that those who can’t shouldn’t criticize others for the way they do it.
Is it a myth that artist don’t care about monetary value? Or is it only making art for art’s sake that has any value? I think that the answer is complex and will probably depend on who you ask. There is no right or wrong here, in my opinion. Everyone should be able to do what they want without being criticized for their choice.
Making sense of art and design industries 