Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rodrigo Istalindir" data-source="post: 1809483" data-attributes="member: 2810">I know pretty much jack about art, but there are other factors that come into play.In the medieval periods, there wasn't much of an 'artist' class.  By that I mean, what we in modern times consider an artist (half-starved, pretentious loft dwellers  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> ).  People who managed to avoid working in the fields and instead spend their days making paintings, sculptures, etc. either had a rich noble patron (much more common in later periods, though), or were commissioned by the Church.  It wasn't, for the most part, a market economy.Second, what makes art expensive now is a combination of scarcity (Picasso only painted so many things), global culture (millions of people know of and like Picasso's work), disposable income (I can buy art because I already have enough money to eat), and especially speculation.The high levels of disposable income in industrialized countries enables people to make a living selling $1000 paintings in local boutiques.  The fact that the last Picasso sold for $12 million encourages people to buy the next one that comes up for auction, often hoping to sell it a few years down the road for a hefty profit.</blockquote>