Vantržišna motivacija tržišta umetničkih dela

IF 0.1 4区 艺术学 0 ART Zivot Umjetnosti Pub Date : 2019-07-01 DOI:10.31664/ZU.2019.104.04
Rastko Močnik
{"title":"Vantržišna motivacija tržišta umetničkih dela","authors":"Rastko Močnik","doi":"10.31664/ZU.2019.104.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Art markets are not homogeneous, the difference being especially between the art products that can be technically reproduced and the unique products. As for the former, regulations of the copyright type introduce certain specificities (the author retains some rights over the object in circulation— for example, she or he can withdraw it). In case of unique goods, the demand is determined by the buyers’ tastes and does not result from some generally valid presupposition: thus, these goods have a price, but they have no value. Since the aesthetic nature of the reproducible works of art is subject to the same laws as the unique artworks, the economy of unique artworks can serve as a paradigm for the economy of artworks in general. According to a theory developed by Rade Pantić, the price of unique artworks is a monopoly rent. As any other rent, it is determined by non-economic mechanisms. These mechanisms should allow for the freedom of individual tastes and at the same time provide a unique field within which these idiosyncratic attitudes can interact. The mechanisms determining the rent (price) of artworks are therefore ideological apparatuses that present themselves and their elements (individual taste judgments) as non-ideological, and moreover formulate the judgments as individual receptions open to “interpretation,” i.e. as cognitive-affective material to be processed in specific symbolic formations (in curatorial practices, art criticism, philosophical interventions, and alike). In contemporary art, the structure of ideological apparatuses reproduces domination-through-fragmentation, typical of contemporary capitalism.","PeriodicalId":41082,"journal":{"name":"Zivot Umjetnosti","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.31664/ZU.2019.104.04","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zivot Umjetnosti","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31664/ZU.2019.104.04","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Art markets are not homogeneous, the difference being especially between the art products that can be technically reproduced and the unique products. As for the former, regulations of the copyright type introduce certain specificities (the author retains some rights over the object in circulation— for example, she or he can withdraw it). In case of unique goods, the demand is determined by the buyers’ tastes and does not result from some generally valid presupposition: thus, these goods have a price, but they have no value. Since the aesthetic nature of the reproducible works of art is subject to the same laws as the unique artworks, the economy of unique artworks can serve as a paradigm for the economy of artworks in general. According to a theory developed by Rade Pantić, the price of unique artworks is a monopoly rent. As any other rent, it is determined by non-economic mechanisms. These mechanisms should allow for the freedom of individual tastes and at the same time provide a unique field within which these idiosyncratic attitudes can interact. The mechanisms determining the rent (price) of artworks are therefore ideological apparatuses that present themselves and their elements (individual taste judgments) as non-ideological, and moreover formulate the judgments as individual receptions open to “interpretation,” i.e. as cognitive-affective material to be processed in specific symbolic formations (in curatorial practices, art criticism, philosophical interventions, and alike). In contemporary art, the structure of ideological apparatuses reproduces domination-through-fragmentation, typical of contemporary capitalism.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
艺术市场的内部激励
艺术市场不是同质化的,尤其是技术上可以复制的艺术产品和独特的艺术产品之间的区别。就前者而言,版权类型的规定引入了某些特殊性(作者保留了对流通对象的某些权利,例如,她或他可以撤回该对象)。在独特商品的情况下,需求是由购买者的品味决定的,而不是由某种普遍有效的前提决定的:因此,这些商品有价格,但没有价值。由于可复制艺术作品的美学性质与独特艺术作品遵循相同的规律,因此独特艺术作品的经济可以作为一般艺术作品经济的范例。根据雷德·潘提克的理论,独特艺术品的价格是垄断租金。和其他租金一样,它是由非经济机制决定的。这些机制应该允许个人品味的自由,同时提供一个独特的领域,让这些特殊的态度可以相互作用。因此,决定艺术品租金(价格)的机制是意识形态的机器,它们将自己及其元素(个人品味判断)呈现为非意识形态,并且将这些判断形成为开放的“解释”的个人接受,即以特定的符号形式(在策展实践、艺术批评、哲学干预等方面)处理的认知情感材料。在当代艺术中,意识形态机器的结构再现了当代资本主义典型的“通过分裂来统治”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Community-Based Photographic Archives and “Potential” Histories of the Cold War in Eastern Europe Field notes revisited Bringing Down the “Archive Fever” Archival Transformations and the Value of Photographic Objects Our Photographs, Old and New
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1