Components of the art market
 

V dannoi teme predlagaiu obsudit 'etot vopros. Nadeius', chto eto pomozet so mnogimi opredeleniiami v dal'neishem. Rasmatrivaem tol'ko zivopis '(dlia nachala, kak korolevu vseh iskusstv, o zivopisi napisano naibol'shee kolichestvo rabot, issledovanii, eto takze pomozet uprostit' mnogie opredeleniia).

Predmet torgovli - kartiny.

Uchastniki rynka: Hudozniki, proizvoditeli holstov, kartona, drevesiny, krasok, rastvoritelei, kistochek, lakov, gromadnogo kolichestva drugih himikatov i prisposob. Uchebnye zavedeniia, prepodavateli, biblioteki, izdatel'skaia promyshlennost ', mozno dobavliat' do beskonechnosti. Konechno ze pokupateli.

Sravnivaia kolichestvo vspomogatel'nyh otraslei, narodu zadeistvovannogo v etot rynok, sprashivaetsia vopros: a tak li dominantny hudozniki na rynke?

Reguliarno prodaiotsia sovsem nebol'shoe kolichestvo kartin (po sravneniiu sfunktsiei drugih uchrezdenii, vovlechionnyh v rynok).

Pozze prodolzu. Na dannom etape hochu donesti ideiu, chto art rynok namnogo bol'she, chem kazetsia, i vovlecheny gorazdo bol'shie sily.

Added after 26 minutes
Kolichestvo proizvodimyh kartin, znachitel'no bol'she kolichestva prodannyh.

Kolichestvo kartin pereprodannyh v ubytok, gorazdo bol'she kolichestva kartin pereprodannyh s pribyl'iu.

Added after 54 minutes
Ia ni v koem sluchae ne hochu umaliat 'znachenie hudoznikov, prosto hotelos' by predstavit' art rynok v tselom, bol'shuiu kartinu.

Painting - the subject of the status (prestige) of consumption (for the majority of buyers).
Cultural and historical artifact, for the minority.

Alexander, the structure of any market or any product it is - one million components, the same if we consider the juice in a bank or mascara.
I think it makes sense to talk about the final product when it is ready to launch on the market and market components that affect the pricing and ways to promote this product. :confused:

Vy vsio pravilno govorite, no v dannoi situatsii ia hotel, chto by vse zadumalis' o sostavliaiuschih. Ne to, chto by opredelit'sia, kto glavnee, a chto by predstavliat 'mehanizm raboty, vozniknovenie tsen, sprosa i pr.

Ved 'ochen' dorogie kartiny, eto v opredelionnoi stepeni "zamanuha" liudei v igru. Kto-to stanovitsia hudoznikom, kto-to - kritikom, kto-to - kollektsionerom, kto-to - kuratorom. No daleko ne vse predstavliaiut igru, v kotoruiu oni igraiut!

Added after 1 minutes
Sovershenno s vami soglasen, a dlia eschio men'shego kolichestva eto udachnaia investitsiia :)

Oh, What a word! Have not heard. :)
I think only at the basic level does not represent, and that's where the bill runs into millions, and often sleep on the plane than on the ground, then it is doing what, all this takes other paths and you see something which others can not see.
Only sense to talk about it?

I've already written about it, is even anecdote on the theme :D

Ia ochen 'staromoden ...:shy:

Added after 4 minutes
A vot i vam anekdot: na neobitaemyi ostrov vybrosilo trioh antk dillerov i tri stula. Vse tri dillera veli uspeshnyi biznes pereprodavaia mebel 'drug drugu :D

I recalled a lecture on politekonomike :)
Universal Capital, Marx's formula: D-T-D ',
where D - the money, T - goods, D '- the amount of money in increments.
If you just want the money turned into money in increments - to intermediate T.
In this case, T - a commodity - labor. In our case, T - is the work of the artist.

Po Marksu eto ne sovsem rabotaet.

I, kstati, T eto kombinatsiia truda hudoznika i prodavtsa.

A vot i paradoks Marksa. Ia ego ispol'zoval v svoei dissertatsii. Perevodit 'seichas ne budu - hochu spat', u nas pozdno .:)

According to Marx: "A commodity is, in the first place, an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another" (Marx, 1867), in this way fine art perfectly qualifies as a commodity in that it satisfies human wants.
However Marx contradicts himself by saying: "... nothing can have value, without being an object of utility. If the thing is useless, so is the labour contained in it; the labour does not count as labour, and therefore creates no value "(Marx, 1867). Fine art, unless a painting is covering hole in the wall, is not a utilitarian object in practical terms. Consequently art and the artist's labour must cost nothing.

I will try to translate. I'm not a translator, do not judge strictly :)
According to Marx: "This product, first and foremost, an object outside us, an object, its properties to satisfy certain human needs (Marx, 1867), so the art may well be regarded as a commodity that satisfies human needs. However, Marx contradicts himself, saying, : ... nothing has value, not being the object of utility. If the object is useless, as well as contained in its work; work is not difficult, and therefore does not create any value '(Marx, 1867). Art, except that if the painting closes the hole in the wall, the subject is not useful in practical plan. Therefore, the art and the artist's work is worthless.

Perfect in us love wine
And good bread in oven for us to sit down,
And the woman who is given,
First, exhausted, we enjoy.

But what we do with the rosy dawn
Above holodeyuschimi heaven
Where silence and unearthly quiet,
What are we to do with the immortal verses?

Not eat nor drink, nor kiss.
Moment runs uncontrollably
We wrung her hands, but again
Sentenced to go all the past, past.

As a boy, forgetting all their games,
Oversees sometimes a maiden bathing
And, knowing nothing about love
All the same tormented by a mysterious desire;

As once in the lush bottlebrush
Revell from the consciousness of impotence
Creature slippery, pochuya on the shoulders
Unborn wings;

Thus, century by century - will soon see, Lord? --
Under the scalpel of nature and art
Screams our spirit, the flesh is weak,
Giving rise to the sixth sense organ.