art world in crisis
[the entire original post - some 38k - was appended to this, pushing
it way over the length limit - please, folks, snip the extraneous
stuff before hitting
From: “Nicholas Ruiz III” editor@intertheory.org Date: January 30, 2007 2:37:09 PM EST To: lbo-talk@lbo-talk.org Subject: RE: [lbo-talk] art world in crisis!
The art world perceives no ‘crisis,’ they are laughing in the same
ATM line
as ourselves; albeit, laughing much more loudly. The recent Klimt
that sold
for well over $100 million made several individuals quite happy indeed.
Then again, in terms of any ‘crisis,’ much depends upon whom we
identify as
a part of the ‘art world’.
Warhol would say the ‘busi-ness’ of art is the same as it ever was…and this is always but a share of the general ‘busi-ness’ of mankind.
Perl’s ‘new’ concept is a repackaged lamentation of the Modern art
critic;
‘ laissez-faire aesthetics’ points only to the familiar shadow of the
larger
metaphysics of Capital that pervades us all; and in particular relief is
Perl himself as he exchanges his writing as the ‘art critic’ for the New
Republic for paychecks he cashes at the same banks as those
‘unethical’ art
dealers. Perhaps Perl should consider writing his fine literature for
free
on a blog–this might give his story a bit more credibility.
Every moment is solicitous among the fittest who survive (or not),
no? What
is truly the exception Perl seeks to construct? That art should not
make
‘too much’ money? Or that only sanctioned conceptualizations of art are
‘admissible’? What is truly at stake in his claim?
NRIII