Hi Joe,

Interesting post! It happens that I just met up with my artist friend.... And we talked about this topic (among others).



I asked him if Salvador Dali was considered a "serious" artist by other artists.... and he said "yes". (He said Dali was considered "up there" with the greats like Van Gogh.) I also asked him the same question about Andy Warhol, and he said "yes", he was considered a "serious" artist too. "Even the painting with the Campbell Soup cans?" I asked. And he said "yes".

Essentially, he said, if they're doing "art" then they're considered "serious" artists....

My meagre understanding of "art" is that it is designed to evoke some kind of "emotional" response, though that's still quite a unspecific definition.... How did Ayn Rand define it?

The way I'm thinking of "art" is as possibly the "ultimate" info-product! (Maybe this is how Dean DuVall is thinking of it!) Just think - a piece of paper, essentially a poster (a print), can sell for a couple hundred bucks. That's a huge mark-up.... And that's not counting other possibilities. If you wanted to (and if it was appropriate), you could sell art on T-shirts, tea towels, cups, and so on, as well as selling prints and the originals....

Here's another story, to add to what I wrote about the Australian artist Ken Done earlier.... As I said before, now he's a financially successful artist, but in a previous career he was an advertising man.

Apparently, when Ken Done wanted to get started in his artistic career, he set up an exhibition of his art works. He found a unique way to get attention. He sent out invitations - printed on T-shirts! These were "artistic" invitations, sent to a variety of journalists. The T-shirt invitations got their attention, and they turned up to his exhibition and reviewed it (he got free publicity).

In addition to that, Ken Done was selling merchandise right from the beginning - T-shirts and other things with his art on them. Apparently, Ken Done made money from his art right from the start. (This was told to me by my artist friend.)

- Dien

> The problem is that no one has really
> defined
> art, except the objectivists...i.e. Ayn
> Rand.
> Until people agree with WHAT art is, there
> is
> no objective standard by which to judge what
> GOOD art is....

> I agree with Michael...otherwise I'd have to
> admit
> that andy warhol was a great artist, which i
> REFUSE to do...but he was commercially
> successful.

> just my 5 bucks worth....


Salvador Dali museum web site