Works in any discipline that qualify as art have a natural social and economic value. The higher the artistry, the higher the economic value.
Citing Chinese painter Zhou Chunya as an example, his 222 paintings are among the world's most expensive works of art with a value of 470 million dollars. His painting "Red Mountain Stone," which was auctioned for 12.56 million yuan, realized the economic value of art.
Art is to add elegance to people's lives. Improve mental health. There are moral artists. Always think of adding fun to the community people. Therefore, it is possible to create far-reaching works of art. Because morality is the total root of everything. Money is the necessity of life for the artiste. To say whether there is a relationship or not, it is this little relationship.
There is. But it is very important to deal with this relationship. Mei Lanfang, Chang Xiangyu are a generation of master artists, they have to rely on art to live, to support their families, to develop their own careers, to accumulate their own wealth. But they were also models of patriotism. Even if the Japanese _Mei Lanfang_ paid more money, Mr. Mei would not go to perform for them. Against the U.S., Mr. Chang Xiangyu donated an airplane for the country, which set off the climax of the nation's donations for the anti-U.S. war against Korea. Art, in the final analysis, is also a job. It is only natural and unjustifiable to rely on one's work for gain. However, if the art is completely put down on money, so that the art becomes a means of worshiping money, then there will be a problem. In a small way, one's artistic life will be uprooted. On the other hand, it will bring ecological pollution to the society. The relationship between art and money is a very important social issue nowadays, which should be taken seriously by the art world.
Thanks! It varies from person to person. Some people rely on art to earn money, some people pursue art to enjoy which does not consider money.
Art has little to do with money, Cao Xueqin wrote Dream of Red Mansions when he was in poverty and scribbling, Su Shi and Liu Zongyuan wrote their famous lines when they were deported, Sima Qian was tortured in the palace and wrote the Chronicle of the Historian, and Du Fu, who saw his youngest son starve to death, wrote Vermilion Gate of Wine and Meat and Frozen Bones on the Road; the more adversity and poverty, the more people see things more profoundly, and the more they are able to write a good work.
Agree with the above students. Art and money are not necessarily related. But in the end it's all related. Art is tied to money. Lose the value of art? But in the end, all art goes back to value. But the art of today has its value. It can't be helped. In today's society, whoever is noble will starve, live in a small house and ride a small car. Throughout history, all art and artifacts. All hit the value of the chrome stamp [cover face]
Thanks for the invitation, the front to climb the 22nd floor, each of them, rational, extreme, middle of the road, to name a few.
Art and money, is a philosophical question. Can not be parallel, one is a flat, one is a tall building.
There have been many philosophical remarks about mediocrity and art before:
Expensive is not necessarily good painting, good painting is definitely expensive.
In the prose and poetry, novels and essays, oil painting and gouache, calligraphy, music, theater and dance, I have been mixed for half a century in these lines. A lot of people mixed into the ripper, I am still naive.
So, your question is already a cliché.
I'll give you a straight answer:
Art is closely related to the money on which it depends, but art is even more closely related to the hard work that goes into producing ideas.
Let me start with Van Gogh. A depressed man who loved to paint and was poor. Without depression there is no art. To be an artist you must be depressed, to be an official you must be vain, to be a businessman you must be sober, to be a philosopher you must be wise.
Van Gogh needed passion to paint. It was good that his brother in business gave him money. He saved his money and spent most of it raising a few pretty little girls until they grew up and married. He loved having beautiful women dangling in front of him, and he passionately produced tons of great works.
I think that if Van Gogh's paintings had sold for money, he would have been treated for his epilepsy quickly, lived a rich life, and produced even more works.
But art is often not worth what it was when the artist was alive. It's the fake art masters who are worth the money. The posthumous recognition after death is hilarious. Van Gogh lived a shitty life and died an honorable death. The good thing is, he lived in his exclusive world and was probably happier than we are. Because in the eyes of a painter, there is only beauty and fine art, no political and economic anxieties. Like Hemingway, even suicide is so scenic.
Van Gogh lived to be 37, with severe epilepsy, and shot himself. That gunshot? rang out, leaving behind sunflowers worth their weight in gold?
Europeans did not gripe about the artist's "good color. After all, he spent his life creating eternal beauty.
Van Gogh's self-portrait.
Artists need tolerance, understanding, money, but also the reflex of conditioning, the desire for beauty to happen in the midst of suffering, to create the masterpieces of the times.
Without the touch of grief, there is no literary art.
Without economic support, there is no literary art.
Without the defeat of the Song and Ming dynasties and the prosperity of the families of Jin Shengxuan Luo Guanzhong Shi Naiyan Cao Xueqin, there would be no "four great masterpieces.
Dear readers of today's headlines, the author, you seriously answer this epoch-making question, itself a great work of social science.
2010 I went to the Louvre in Paris to participate in the exhibition of beauty, to see the old lady to the snow sketching painters to send hot buns, I was very touched by the French art is the development of the atmosphere of national respect. Our artistic creation is always very embarrassing in the stretched. Painters have to lower their noble head like capitalists to make money.
In addition to the fickleness, cover the volume of contemplation, modern people want to get tired of the stench of copper and to the stench of copper to squeeze. It is difficult to be a human being. I am the same. The day before yesterday a calligraphy in the network auction to 18,000, I bought back, the next day and then auctioned to 57,000, only willing to hammer. For money, I do not lack of money. Human beings are to gold and silver on art, occupation of the market, the real art can not be the enemy into my retreat.
Price is a reflection of value.
People spell title spell title spell birth spell master, I have no background, can only spell price. Wrong?
"Mountain chrysanthemum blossom" original
The following ink bamboo, I 150000 before letting go. Why should people walk the red carpet for hundreds of thousands of dollars?
People spell father spell fresh meat spell value spell belly, we engage in calligraphy and painting to spell what? The only thing you can do is to spell out the ink and brush technique on the paper.
The day before yesterday, the creation of the "Village Harbor"
People, including artists, are living in power, money, cars, houses, beautiful women surrounded by everyone says money and open your eyes, you just ask the artist to close his eyes and pretend not to see, depending on the money as dirt?
Life, quality of life is the ultimate goal. Anything else is a pretext. Don't talk big to me, try being penniless yourself.
Nowadays, the flow of information is so advanced that there are no very good works and poor artists.
I paint and write for money in the first place. My family was so poor that I almost died chewing grass roots on my bare ass and gnawing on tree bark. For the development of national culture and art and the old steed, that is later eaten.
When the life of hard work, experienced the power of economic coveting, the disaster of the soup and fire, the catastrophe, the armored return to the field, return to his hometown, and then seriously see the sunset is infinitely good.
Today, I wander in the back garden every morning on the hemp stone road in the quiet, I will also think of people who are still fighting in the struggle, they, in the art, or for the money?
This morning's shot.
Easy money satisfies, is affluence.
What is never satisfied is art.
Anyway,
have fun.
Art must have something to do with money! Without money how to learn art, art, learning art must have money to support, no money how to buy learning materials? Exchange the results of the art after learning back to the money, and then create and sell again, this is a law. Called art must be related to money, for example, painters, calligraphers exhibition, text writers published literary publications, musicians, dancers performances, and so on, and so on, these are the need for money to do, except for public welfare charity, in fact, public welfare charity is also related to money. At the ceremony of public charity, the organizer will tell everyone that so-and-so has donated so-and-so worth N RMB for this event? Art itself must have value, this value using money embodied, only embodied in a different way. Even the headline has issued a certain amount of money as a reward for the work created by the author. Not to mention the work of art called art? Often people say "money, not everything, but without money is never. Just for reference.
Having a relationship is to live. It doesn't matter or don't want to have a relationship, is for the pure and elegant art. But I think that elegance and vulgarity are never dependent on each other, and so is the relationship between art and money.
Let's start with a few names, Qi Baishi, Pan Tianshou, Xu Beihong, Zhang Daqian, Li Kuchan and so on! How about their works? Call it a work of art, right? Since that's the case, let's see if these artists have anything to do with money. Qi Baishi Zhang Daqian do not need to talk about it! Two of the century's greats are selling paintings for a living, do you think art and money have anything to do with each other? Pan Tianshou, Xu Beihong, Li Kuchan is not purely to sell paintings for a living, but you have to know, Pan Tianshou, Xu Beihong, Li Kuchan are the Dean of the Academy of Fine Arts or Professor ah! People have a salary, by the way, and then sell a few paintings is also there, you say art and money has nothing to do with? Well, since there is a relationship between art and money, the works of these great masters are no longer works of art? Do they cease to be artists?
Art and money are related! Artists and painters are human beings who have to shit and piss. What I mean by can't be related is that a person who wants to be successful in art can't have money on his mind.
To engage in art is to ideals and realize their own values; and money is to survive and complete their own task in this life, there is nothing wrong with this, the first morality after the dream is a human being, we are all mortal, elegant and vulgar can not exist alone.
No! No! There is nothing at all!