The picture sale of Mouseion

@What decides the proprietary value of a picture, beauty or story? These two are the sources of all arts: the former purifies individual art, and the latter fuses multiple fields of art. It is a very difficult task for us to recognize that what is beautiful is beautiful, and build a public consensus that it is beautiful. On the other hand, it is comparatively easy that some story is acknowledged as a real story, because it is comprehended with internal experience of a lot of people.
  The artworks including pictures are placed closely between difficult-to- recognize   beauty and easy-to-understand story. Because literature is a pure story, it is released from the difficulty of recognition of beauty. However, poetry, music and pictures are, being concerned with beauty in some way, faced with a tough question that what beauty is when it comes to valuating them as property.
  If we accept only one form that was publicly recognized at a certain period as the sole beauty, this will not be a tough question. As Ancient Egypt and the Byzantine Empire had a fixed standard of beauty, they were free from such thorny question that "what is beauty?". In these cases, art was no more than a reproduction of the identical beauty or at best only its refinement, it reached to mastery of a workman.
  However, now that it is taken for granted that beauty is variable and changeable with the times, intricate question as explained above arises. Tentatively, it may be only knowable standard that contrastive form to common form which a lot of artists use in some times has high possibility to become a new beauty in the following times.
  If beauty is difficult to recognize, the question - who decides it - is focused. Who does make beauty recognized as social authority in a certain period of times? Let's see the beauty which appears in picture. Is it a person like Pope Julius II, a patron of religious world who sponsored a number of masterpieces of religious pictures? Or, is it one like emperor Rudolf IIof Hapsburg house who poured his colossal wealth into pictures as worldly collector ? Or, is it one like a picture dealer Daniel-Henri Kahnweiler who had a keen sense of a current of the new era? Or is it an enterpriser like Albert C. Barnes who has worked up his way from one of general public to made a vast wealth and become a collector in the new epoch, being favored with beneficence of capitalism? Or is it like an art historian Clement Greenberg who grasped significance of modern art in the lapse of time?
  All of these may be right, or any of them may not be right. The difficulty to recognize beauty ranges over choosing a beauty decider. Beauty acts only on our subjectivity. Hence, subjectivity alone is not sufficient to make beauty valuable as property; it only confirms subjective value. It is necessary for beauty to be grounded on the consensus of a lot of subjectivity in order to be a proprietary value. Theoretically, there are two processes that beauty, as consensus, is formed. One is the case that a specific authority designates it, another is that general public generates it spontaneously: the former can be paraphrased into dictatorial designation of beauty, and the latter into democratic formation of beauty.
  When beauty is apprehended by common consciousness of the public and is recognized as an objective value, it takes a special form. A special form means explicit beauty; preceding situation is just potential beauty. Explicit beauty, in modern times, an appropriate word to prescribe it is prepared ? what we call a "brand".
  Viewing theoretically, a specific monocrat or general public creates a "brand", but the latter never created it in actual history. (In music, famous piece is sometimes formed among general public in the form of folksong. Another example is that Eduard Hanslick's harsh criticism on Richard Wagner's works, but Wagner's popularity drowned it out. However, unless someone designates a "brand" in fine arts, it will never be recognized as masterpiece. Sad to say, it is a nature peculiar to fine arts.) General public is carrying a role of providing economic basis for artwork through their purchasing activity, but in reference to creating a "brand", or concretization of beauty, they are just through and through audiences.
  Today, extensive real-time interactive communication is technically enabled, "the public opinion" can be grasped in a moment. Thus, if applied this way, "brand" creation by general public may be viable, it is difficult to surely predict its result though.
  From the opposite viewpoint, a "brand" has always been made by a monocrat in the world of fine arts in real history, and is expected to be the same in the future. Politically monocrat is given a strong negative meaning, but in field of art in which public political power is not exercised and people's hobby is made richer, he has a lot of constructive roles.
  Also, a political monocrat monopolizes power for a long time, and his power is approved by visible authority as state. However, for a monocrat in fine arts world, such an established authority does not exist. For this reason, it cannot help becoming temporary and variable. Thus privileged status is not given to a monocrat in fine arts world nor lifetime honor is guaranteed. In other words, anyone can become a monocrat, and he can be ousted from that position at any time. Such unstable position does not fall under the category of political monocrat.
  Therefore, "monocrat in fine arts world" is just a linguistic analogy, and unless he is not in collusion with political monocrat, he is totally affirmative and indispensable existence to explicate beauty. However, if this way of saying might pervert its meaning beyond metaphor of words, in order to avoid distortion of the reason, paraphrasing this to "the brand maker" would be appropriate.
  Aforementioned Pope and emperor of the Hapsburg house might be the "brand maker" in some specific times. Observing actual history, before modern times, the "brand maker" who could provide plenty of medium and support to painters was inseparably linked with religious or political authority.
  However, in about middle of the 19th century, it was revealed that these authorities were not any longer monopolistic subjects of creating a "brand", underpinned by famous "the Salon des Refuses" in 1863. When the time of mass production of medium and support came, the "brand maker" was automatically detached from political authority, paving the way for above-mentioned enterprisers, picture dealers and art historians to appear.
  Even if explicit form of beauty, a "brand", is clarified, the difficulty to recognize beauty itself isn't canceled, it still follows round a "brand" creation. If any, only one different point is that, there is a constant empirical law for the methods of creating "a brand", and if only it is observed, the possibility to invent a "brand" might become higher.
  Realistic and dramatic description of person, vivid color and homely theme seem to be a condition to easily create a "brand", but if used repeatedly, it will be just branded as "follower"; there is no clue to determine a "brand". If superhuman powers of concentration and a transcendental technique are injected into some work, the probability that it becomes a "brand" will be higher, but it is only afterwards that it is proved to be a "brand". After all, a "brand" has no choice but to be discovered by trial and error.
  "Brand" is a special concrete form of beauty and it has different elements from pure beauty, represented by the fact that character of a painter, or originator of work, is related to some degree. As for determination of beauty, the painter has no qualification or authority, but in creation of a "brand", he/she has a big influence.
  Not only cultural area or contemporary style in the painter's background, but also his name, appearance and life drama concern it. If Pablo Ruiz Picasso was called by his long real name which is difficult to memorize, could his works have become a "brand" easily like that? If Amedeo Modigliani was not a handsome man, more times might have been needed until his works became a "brand". Caravaggio's life filled with ups and downs might have given brilliance to dramatic composition of his works; it may have spurred on becoming a "brand".
  Being screened out with sieve called time, a "brand", even though it may finally converge on beauty, at the early days after its debut as a work, its evaluation is sometimes affected by the law peculiar to the "brand". In this point, a "brand" creation resembles a work to produce a movie star and a singer.
  In short, the "brand" has almost nothing to do with original beauty, but without this, the difficulty to recognize beauty isn't canceled. Therefore the "brand" is a necessary evil for fine arts. A lot of people cannot understand their own sense of beauty just as they cannot easily find out the purposes of their life. Therefore, it is a function of the "brand" that makes general public, who does not have an eye for beauty, believe that they understand the beauty.
  The level of the effect of the "brand" is different in each art field. Pure art (reine Kunst) is obviously affected more than composite art (Gesamtkunst). Among pure art, fine arts are more affected compared with literature or music, and among fine arts in ascending order, architecture, sculpture, picture and photograph. The ratio of increase in economic value by conferment of the "brand" is overwhelming in picture.
  As for picture, in case of representational painting, a work is made a "brand" first; the painter is next. In abstraction picture, it follows the reverse course. Mouseion plans to invest resources into the "brand" making in proportion to its weight in each art field.

  Mouseion does not exclude a conventional way of picture sale but its purpose is all for aimed at the above-mentioned "brand making" project. In many cases, usual picture sale begins with monopoly of established "brand" works. Then, when "brand" works are not available, picture sale sometimes deviates to counterfeit sale.
  The supreme "brand" work is only the original one and it is privileged favorite item of the rich. General public competes to buy its replica and is only made to support bottom price of the "brand". In any case, plan and volition to new "brand" creation are very weak there.
  Mouseion tries to incorporate the "brand making"- which has been accomplished with intuition and immense labor up to now - into daily business activity with full use of the Internet, or a product of present-day science and technology which can take in global and popular expanse in a moment.
  If trying to discover the "brand" which can be found only by trial and error in the frame of conventional economic activity, a lot of time and cost will be taken. However, in the computer network which can process enormous information in a second, it is possible to almost eliminate these time and cost by reproducing and verifying the "brand making" on several-centimeter square's semiconductors. It resembles that the weather forecast which could not help depending on the skill of experienced observer became possible to be measured in a short time by supercomputer.

  Even if a "brand" is at first designated by a monocrat, it is not completed unless general public accepts it. General public has unconsciously accustomed to the way of thinking or behavior in their indigenous cultural area, so necessarily a "brand" often becomes "brand" in the cultural area where it was produced. Put in another word, a "brand" is a product of domestic market. On advanced thought, a "brand" is difficult to become an object for import and export.
  Then, because, as mentioned above, creation of a picture "brand" can not be popular, to connect it with import and export does not come into view of an entrepreneur who attempts to collect his capital in a short period.
  However, thinking from opposite side, because there is a business chance where no one tries to step in, it is possible to say that future of picture dealings depends on creation and exportation of the "brand". Then, Mouseion will concentrate its energy on export a "brand" as much as its creation by using arms called the Internet.
  Picture work scarcely becomes a "brand" in international market crossing the wall of cultural area. Japanese kneel downs to the European culture, but what to be counted as "brand" unconditionally are works of only: three great masters of the Italian Renaissance, impressionists in the 19th century, Pablo Ruiz Picasso and Marc Chagall. Works of Giovanni Cimabue, Giotto, Andrea Mantegna, Tintoretto, Albrecht Durer, Nicolas Poussin, Jean-Antoine Watteau, Jacque-Louis David, Max Ernst and so on are not guaranteed to become a "brand" in Japan in spite of the key roles they played in art history.
  Similarly, as for picture of Japan, what may become an international "brand" will be limited to the 18th century's Ukiyoe which fits to the exoticism of the Westerners. Since the 19th century, in Japan, traditional Japanese style painting and "Youga" (Western painting that adopted west European technique) developed rapidly, but there were few examples that masterpieces among them became an international "brand". (Japanese style paintings developed after the second half of 19th century were pictured in reformed style which was advocated by American east art historian Ernest FenollosakCurator of the Department of Oriental Art at Boston Museum of Fine Artsland his Japanese cooperator Tenshin OkakurakFirst Director of the Tokyo Art Schooll; they are different from the Westerners' favorite works which were pictured before the first half of the 19th century.)
  This poorness of international "brand" may be due to negligence of all those who engaged in picture criticism and dealings. Because today, distance on the earth has been remarkably shrinked compared with fifty years ago, it is a disgrace for human culture that contents of international "brand" still remain at the level of the 19th century.
  Mouseion classifies cultural area of picture on the earth into following nine areas: the West Europe and Oceania, Russia and the East Europe, Mediterranean, North America, South America, the East Asia, the South East Asia, India, the Middle East (Africa exists as a common basis in all cultural areas, so it will be handled as a special culture area.) Inside of each area is a domestic picture market, and a work made there has high probability to be appreciated a "brand" by general public, or inhabitants. On the other hand, when a picture is traded across each cultural area, an international market is formed.
  Of course, Mouseion does not ignore a "brand" creation in this domestic market. However, with same ardor, we schedule to draft various plans for "brand" creation in the international market.
  Viewing at a worldwide scale, there are nine domestic markets and thirty-six international markets linking them mutually. In all these forty-five markets, Mouseion will create the most profitable "brand". As described above, these markets on earth can be simulated in one server thanks to highly progressed integrated circuits. By reflecting samples of gusto and purchasing activity of general appreciator, art critic and so on, in statistically reliable number, in the server, we'll be able to rationally estimate that which artwork can become a "brand". In short, this is cyber marketing. And the person who is interested in the "brand making" project has the same will of ours.

 

  < Next > < Back To Sale >

Home    Page Top  About Mouseion  Back to the gist

Copyright (C) 2007 Mouseion. All Rights Reserved.
mouseion icon
@Home
@About Mouseion 
@Thesis
@Gallery
@Contest
@Sale
@Contact Mouseion
Cyber Museum Mouseion Thank you for your access !
| Home| Staff | BBS | Link | Mail | Site Map |