The artist in the art market - the criteria for participation

[I-V]

The question is very simple : everyone is an artist (wider - Homo sapiens)), more or less regularly sells the product a art, may be party to the art market?

If not, what are the criteria by which an artist can still be considered a party of the art market ? And is there at all? thank you

[Maskit]

It seems to me that this question, in one form or another has already been covered and covered in the forum, and in its specific formulation is nothing but demogogii cause can not.

[I-V]

Сообщение от Maskit; 1951661"

in its specific formulation is nothing but demogogii cause can not .

Because it has no concrete answer?

 Perhaps because the artists and amateurs ( in the broadest sense , as an art dealers can not not love him ) never meet the definitions - what is the art market ? Demagoguery is not here?

[Maskit]

You are absolutely pravy.V discussion on this topic can be drowned in verbiage, better cover specific situations.

[I-V]

Сообщение от Maskit; 1951921"

in the discussion of this topic can be drowned in verbiage , better to cover specific situations .

It is hard to argue with that . But: the legality of a specific discussion of the figure ( Wasi Lozhkina ) in this thread http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showth...=147691&page=7 been questioned. "John Lozhkin not a member of the art market ," said a number of users. It was also believed that - member. Dispute ...

And so, in response to this argument , and I have formed the subject . Only because I did not understand : is there some kind of objective argument as to why this or that artist can or can not called participant in the art market. Or evidence of participation ( not participating ) only subjective , and each , in its discretion , is free to " decide for itself "? And how did discuss particular of the situation on the art market has not yet resolved this dilemma ?

The question, of course , I understand from the field , "What is truth?" , But still >

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от IV; 1952191"

party of the art market

If " art market " is purely formal understanding sale of any relevance to the art ( picture postcards also sell , buy, there is a market for them , they collect and sell at auction ), then some amateur pictures and underpasses are also involved in this the market.
But I would not compare the art market with farmers' markets where they sell potatoes, onions and lamb , beef, so all they need.

[I-V]

Cyril, some common authoritative community (if it is, of course, is in Russia) opinion on this is available?
For a specific definition, as in medicine, for example?
>

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от IV

Cyril, some common authoritative community (if it is, of course, is in Russia) opinion on this is available?
For a specific definition, as in medicine, for example?
>

I do not know.

I will not tell the entire Odessa, Odessa all very high ... (c) 7 ~ <!--~
->

Added after 4 minutes

Сообщение от fabosch

you so scared that the COP is not considered a party to the art market that you are numb and can not discuss?

numb, freeze, ledeneyut. (c) >

[Art-Galera]

pardon the platitude , but if we go by the definition of " art market ", ie The first and main criterion has already been set - a kind of art and commercial history of this artist. in other cases , it can certainly be a party , for example, the art process, the art scene , etc., etc. is which wants to be a definite choice.

[манна]

Сообщение от IV; 1952221"

Cyril, some generally accepted authoritative community (if it is, of course, is in Russia) opinion on this is available? For a specific definition, as in medicine, for example?

I -V. he said to you, read carefully Forum > >

http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showpo...&postcount=233

Modern art - it is also a system rather rigid rules of etiquette, it is unclear from the side. For example: the artist himself does not have to sell their work, to show it should be written in the text of a famous critic, and even better philosopher or politician, should work intellectually, but in any case not in an emotional manner, the product should be "critical" or " provocative "nature, which would under this or understand; success - a success only in certain international institutions, a list which will delight the professional and not say anything to the uninitiated, wider audience interest does not mean anything at all, etc. If the author of these rules does not know what he looks like "naive". Sometimes he can be glorified in that capacity.

All of the former Soviet art in which so prized painting from nature, emotion, imagination, paint, love the wide audience (all that with today's "corporate" point of view slightly indecent), can be considered naive in this sense, though today it exists already in other forms, often in the form of "individual private enterprise."

We read and we can conclude: Lozhkin not a party to the art market, but only ECP (individual entrepreneur).