Bad capitalism, sometimes better looking capitalism

The art word is rigged. Everyone knows that. The silly nature of the individual and their perseverance is the only thing that keeps artists studying and thinking they will be a great artist one day, not knowing what they are getting in for.

I experienced the artworld for three years. I experienced a world in which money has no bounds, the cost of making a piece of work is ludricous and that is one of the reasons to sell it at exorbitant prices. Attached to the price tag comes the prestige of a commercial gallery, which either fishes out artists from biennals or from personal advice whispered in secret soireés by multi-millionaire collectors or friends of gallerists. It's a closed circle, that is only penetrable through the institutionalisation of your work. Some artists are fine with it, others become street artists. There is no in between. Small galleries have no fixed clientelle and they do much of promoting an artist in their first years of career, when sales only come at Christmas time and the activity is considered, probably by both ends of the spectrum, extra 'carrercular', but it's only at a 'connections' level that this activity becomes full-time.

I always thought that the state would be in for commissioning more than it does, however that is due to the fact that a lot of the public space is actually privatised, we just don't know about it. Artists are as multi-faced as there are artworks, and the current art-world only takes a prescribed type of artworks: those of who make the artworld. And who is in the artworld? Those who are in the artworld want it to be. And who wants to be in the artworld? Artists who are not in the artworld and artists who don't want to be in the artworld. How is that? because there is always an artworld for your work. But why does nobody buy my work? because you are not selling it to the right artworld. In theory, to me, there are two artworlds.

The art-world of the millions, the one that defines itself, defines the art movements, trends, prices, market behaviour, talent, skill is all run around the most trivial of worldy things: money. Money is a portal I come to think. It's like it can let you in other dimensions, as if it grants you access to your own world, one that you build along the years. To some people, artists, whatever little or larger amount of money, it allows the artist to develop their world accordingly. This, as a starting point does interfere with practice time, but effort measurements aside, any result is only possible if materials were spent and time consumed. One day, someone, wants to give you money for your artwork. Someone wants to build their world, so they are giving you an opportunity to use the portal. By granting someone to accesss your world, because you passed it on to this person you parted from that dimension, because now instead, you are holding money, a portal to build your own world. So this portal only allows you a certain amount of exchanges and it's all about exchanging. I'm back to where we began: the institution of money was an exchange programme. Who are we exchanging what with? (TBC)


Recent Posts
Archive