William wrote: > Maybe artists should put one of those little > lawyer's clocks by their studio doors and punch in and out, and punch again when > unsolicited visitors stop by with Berg-like questions and comments.
Everything involves economic considerations. Everything. Decisions about every aspect of life are influenced by whether a thing can be done, how much it will cost to do, how much it will cost not to do, what other things must be put aside or altered in order to do the first thing. These are fundamentally economic questions. So why does Berg imply that economic questions are antithetical to art Ultimately, it comes down to the agreed selling price between the artist and buyer. Even if the artist sells through a broker (gallery) who takes a commission, the artist agrees that the money he receives after the commission is acceptable. Whether it's calculated by a hourly rate, square inches, costliness of the materials, etc., the final transaction is an agreement by each side: the artist agrees that the price is an acceptable reimbursement and the buyer agrees that the price is an acceptable expense. All of the other stuff that William mentions, which are certainly germane and important, concern the ways in which the status of the artist/worker is established and supported. The buyer makes requirements on the artist, even though the buyer doesn't do the work. And reciprocally, the artist can make requirements on the buyer. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Michael Brady
