Gerhard Richter New Paintings Albertinum

[@vitralesencostarica4228]

Excelente

[@randygeyer4730]

Do these people actually understand driving art?

[@neilmurphy7554]

It is impossible for any work of art once valorised in culture not to find an equivalent value in monetary terms. If it was possible it would imply that there is an escape route possible from Capitalism. Nothing can escape Capitalism regardless of how much we would like it to be otherwise. At the very least, the value assigned to an art work at least ensures that it will be likely to be cared for. Even the Catholic Church which makes great claims on its conquest over materialist values owns billions of dollars in real estate all over the world. Every art work is not important enough to reside in public collections. Professional MA degree holding Fine Arts graduates earn less on average than graduates from other disciplines despite their degrees costing the same. Are the fees they pay"dirty money" to enable them to participate in the benefits of enjoying the fruits of their studies along with their peers with MBA's? If they make money from selling their art is that "dirty money". Do financial and govt. organisations waive academic fees so that studying art is free and so that everyone can obtain free art. Is an artists time spent making art "free". If artists are morally obliged to conform to delusional ideas about the value of art being tied to "dirty money" then they will be consigned to the romantic dustbin of bourgeois history. This history refuses to face the reality of the ideological conditions it actually has an interest in imposing on the fate of artistic careers ie. that artists don't do real work..... that art and money should be considered separately ....... but still in a truly bigoted way insist on making a distinction between artists who work 'part-time' whilst having a seperate career ie. negative, and those artists making a living from their at practice ie. positive. We should be more aware of the derogatory connotations embedded in most discussions decrying the value art, which is usually really a tabloid and perverse attack and interest in how other people spend money. Most art practice is devalued and much interesting and important art is actually undervalued and subject to outdated hegemonic hierarchical values ie. painting..sculpture:high, and printed matter: low despite the slow but imminent vanishing of printed matter into virtual space. I happen to think their is no real value in the delusional derision of art having 'value' . The marginalisation of art education reinforcing outmoded thinking that refuses to accept that 'art' is a given in intellectual life and not a finger painting recreational activity after the maths lesson is more worthy of consideration. It is so very disappointing to hear Richter make such reactionary moralistic statements.