Fine art loses aesthetic value when removed from its creative location into wealth

Evidence

Aesthetics of the fine arts, in modernity a peripheral domain, often gives way to the forces of capitalism, rendering these arts “commercial” or at least easily susceptible to material and commodified valuation. It is a tacit rule that to be regarded as a painter, one must have exhibited and sold her paintings; the latter is essential to what it means to be a “real” artist. Likewise, a Picasso in 1905 in Picasso’s Paris studio may be said to express the aesthetics of the artist, a pure form of artistic pleasure and production, but the same Picasso on a billionaire’s yacht can be said to have significantly lost its “aesthetic location.” The monetization of a Picasso, a Renoir, or a Bacon has relegated the domain of aesthetics to a secondary status, making it peripheral, which is to say, subordinate. — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 69 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Prestige seeking replaces genuine enjoyment in cultural consumption; Art’s exchange value replaces and is mistaken for its use value — Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment, 118; The grey, disenchanted look of the world stems from its commodity character. (+13 more)

Broader Connections

• Capitalist commodification displaces the aesthetic value of art #corroborates (0.95) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 69