"Art and Value" Panel Discussion
CUE Art Foundation
This event has ended.
How do we value art? Arts journalism has been quick to respond to the recession with talk of an art market boom turned bust. These responses, though, have mostly told two tales. In one version, recessions are good for art. The art world of the last few years had become increasingly conservative and corporate; now without the pressure of selling their work, artists are free to experiment and without inflated real estate prices, non-commercial spaces can thrive. In the other version, a booming art market wasn't just about hedge-fund collectors and cash-flush auction houses, it also allowed artists to make a living off of their work and provided an unprecedented amount of entry level jobs in the arts. Artists with day jobs are not so free and scaling back the infrastructure surrounding art means less jobs for artists who are not making a living off of their work.
Both of these responses acknowledge a relationship between how we value art economically, as something to be bought and sold, and how we value art culturally, as something we deem meaningful and around which we structure our lives, even if neither response assumes that these two forms of value are concurrent. The question remains, however, what relationship do these very different forms of value have to one and other? Ad Hoc Vox has brought together members from the fields of anthropology, art history, economics, and philosophy to respond to this question.
The discussion participants include Lynn Catterson, Elizabeth Currid, David Graeber, Paul Mattick, and Don Thompson. Colleen Asper will moderate the panel, which will be followed by a Q&A with the audience.
Media
Schedule
April 08, 2009 from 19:00
Artist(s)
Lynn Catterson, Elizabeth Currid, David Graeber, Paul Mattick, Don Thompson