ART: I do not know who "they" is. There are certainly people who buy the work and others who buy the artist. Once the work is an investment that motivation probably outweighs the latter. There is an obv (...)

Is a work of art purchased, or is it better said, that it is the artist who is bought?

Whohub

Werner Stürenburg [joe1948]

I do not know who "they" is. There are certainly people who buy the work and others who buy the artist. Once the work is an investment that motivation probably outweighs the latter.

There is an obvious reason for this. There are not many objects unique to this world. Only those objects are suitable for speculation. With music recordings and books you can only speculate in exceptional cases, namely when the offer is scarce and limited, and is not extensible.

As the artists as a rule produce unique works, those are ideally suited for speculation. The more money someone has to hide somewhere, the more interesting the prime pieces are to the art market. Nowhere else you can swap a lot of money quickly. If that is established anonymously, the money laundering system is perfect. What else do you ask for?

This mechanism naturally does art no good. Even in Wikipedia, art is judged on its auction value and the appreciation of the artist is derived from that. When someone spends so many millions, the work must indeed be good, right?

Of course, this situation invites to speculation and manipulation. There are artists companies everywhere whose sole purpose is to increase the market value of the deceased artist. Of course, the owners of the artworks of this artist are very interested in this development and therefore member of such associations.