By ann summers
What does it mean to own artwork when for some, its worth is only in terms of its material costs much like reducing a human’s value to their constituent matter which at present is $3.50.
For those making artwork, what happens when custodial ownership is transferred by the artist to an agent like the gallery owner, and then commodified and sold at a price to a collector. Should royalties be available when the artwork is resold, inherited, or insured for damage.
Disowning one’s artwork can be about reclaiming authorship: will the gallery owner return the commission and what about royalties. And owning or collecting objects for some like deals themselves can be claimed as having an “art” to them, even if they’re ghost-written rather than plagiarized.
Richard Prince Just Showed Artists a Way to Fight Trump. And May Have Cracked Open a New Contemporary Art Code Too. In the weeks before the election, it’s important to note, it had come to light that the Kushner-Trumps are collectors of contemporary art — surely this had been known by some in the art world before, but in the fever of the election the fact spread like a scandal. In their collection are artists like Prince, Joe Bradley, Christopher Wool, Nate Lowman, Alex Da Corte, Alex Israel, Dan Colen, and many other very famous artists. I don’t blame artists for who owns their work. But on Wednesday Prince took an unusual step against his own collectors, in this case Jared and Ivanka, who’d bought the Instagram portrait. In his tweet he flatly asserted, “This is not my work. I did not make it. I deny. I denounce. This fake art.” He later emailed me that he returned the $35,000 that had been paid for the picture and wrote, “I’ve disowned the work. The work is no longer mine.” I loved it…
Prince’s act of disownership opens up an incredible window of resistance to artists, and, immediately on social media, he found himself explaining. “Redacting Ivanka’s portrait was an honest choice between right and wrong. Right is art. Wrong is no art. The Trumps are no art,” he wrote. “Not a prank. It was sold to IvankaTrump & I was paid 36k on 11/14/2014. The money has been returned. SheNowOwnsAfake.” Then: “Make Trump small again.” And finally: “This should not B confused with aesthetics. This is not a gesture. This is an action. Something I have control over. A yesOrNo.” .
More importantly, did Richard Prince’s gallery feel obligated to make its own statement about the “disownership” percentage it took when the artwork was sold. Other artists have been making similar protests about resisting the Trumps’ role in the artworld, by trying to reclaim some connection to their artwork.
A group of artists have come together demanding that Ivanka Trump remove their artwork from her New York City apartment.
According to Bloomberg, the artists, who formed the Halt Action Group, have initiated the “Dear Ivanka” Instagram campaign as a way to protest President-elect Donald Trump through his daughter.
The Halt Action Group has an Instagram feed in which they repost glossy stock images of Trump along with earnest appeals about what they foresee as the dire consequences of her father’s politics—topics addressed include global warming, universal health care, and contraception policy.
Hoping to “thwart the normalization of what was unfolding in front of our eyes,” Gingeras said, the group, comprised of artists, dealers, psychoanalysts, and even a few collectors, reached out to the artists featured in Trump’s Instagram feed. They asked the artists to join them and ask Ivanka “to answer for some of the hypocrisy she embodies,” Gingeras said.
(2014) Recently, New York City Democratic Congressman Jerrold Nadler, along with U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) introduced their own artist resale royalty bill into Congress, the ART (American Royalties Too) Act. The legislation proposes a 5 percent royalty on secondary market sales of at least $5,000 and a 7 percent royalty on such sales of at least $10,000, applicable only to sales at auction houses that sold more than $1 million in artwork during the previous year.
And in a world where Dutch artists get a regular wage, how do artists get paid.
…the 1977 California Resale Royalty Act—the first artist royalties provision in U.S. history. For a brief time, that law gave some American artists a taste of royalties, until it was struck down in 2012. Meanwhile, artist resale royalties (or droit de suite) have long been a basic right in 70 other countries; France has had such a system since 1920, and the European Union standardized it across the continent in 2001. They’re so common that the U.S. Copyright Office specifically revised its position on artists’ royalties last year, recommending that Congress revisit the issue. (2014)
Then there’s the transience of art food
For many, education has been the means to attain “taste” even if like the philosophy of food, Whole Food always trumps holistic food.
In the twenty-first century, philosophers continue to address these issues and new ones concerning the globalization of food, the role of technology, and the rights and responsibilities of consumers and producers. Typically, these philosophers call their work “food ethics” or “agricultural ethics.” But I think they sell themselves short. Philosophers do more than treat food as a branch of ethical theory. They also examine how it relates to the fundamental areas of philosophical inquiry: metaphysics, epistemology, aesthetics, political theory, and, of course, ethics. The phrase “philosophy of food” is more accurate. We might eventually come to think of the philosophy of food as a perfectly ordinary “philosophy of” if more philosophers address food issues and more colleges offer courses on the subject—or at least that is my hope.
An acquired taste often refers to an appreciation for a food or beverage that is unlikely to be enjoyed by a person who has not had substantial exposure to it, usually because of some unfamiliar aspect of the food or beverage, including a strong or strange odor, taste, or appearance.
as for a social view of Taste,
Although Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Judgement (1790) did formulate a non-relativistic idea of aesthetical universality, where both personal pleasure and pure beauty coexisted, it was concepts such as class taste that began the attempt to find essentially sociological answers to the problem of taste and aesthetics. Metaphysical or spiritual interpretations of common aesthetical values have shifted towards locating social groups that form the contemporary artistic taste or fashion…
Bourdieu argued against Kantian view of pure aesthetics, stating that the legitimate taste of the society is the taste of the ruling class.
This position also rejects the idea of genuine good taste, as the legitimate taste is merely a class taste. This idea was also proposed by Simmel, who noted that the upper classes abandon fashions as they are adopted by lower ones.
As always it becomes a matter of property and the appraising its appropriation where taste as we’ve seen in the case of Orange GazBag, favors a world of avarice and inequality.