• Guy Dudeman@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    6 days ago

    I mean, productivity in what sense? Artists can be considered productive with just one completed piece.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      21·
      6 days ago

      Only if somebody with disposable income pays. Art has no intrinsic value UNlike a commodity for example.

      • Guy Dudeman@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        6 days ago

        On the contrary, art has intrinsic value to those who experience it. Why commission public murals, Why commission public statues and sculptures, if art has no intrinsic value?

        • Zorque@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          6 days ago

          Because it has subjective value. And often times those public pieces aren’t there to showcase art for arts sake, but as a showcase of how much the politician cares about the community. In a purely theatrical way, of course.

          And, depending on ones own interpretation, assigning intrinsic material value to art reduces it’s value as art. Making it less art and more commodity.

          • Guy Dudeman@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            6 days ago

            Hmm. Maybe you’re right. But I still think art for art’s sake is worth appreciating and supporting.

            • Zorque@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              6 days ago

              But of course. No one said otherwise.

              That doesn’t mean it has intrinsic material value, though. That being the metric inferred by the comic we’re all talking about.