Michael Gruber -- The forgery of Venus
========================================

This is an excellent book to stimulate and inform a discussion about
value in art.  While reading this book, I'd suggest that you think
about the different *kinds* of value that art has.  Chaz, the main
character, himself is conflicted about what kind of value his work
has, for example whether it has commercial value or resale value in
the art market or value for its beauty or value for its inspiration
and so on.  You might want to try to determine whether Chaz's
thoughts and conversations about the value of his and other thoughts
either help clarify your own ideas about how and why art is value or
whether they blur and muddy those thoughts.

And, speaking of blurring issues, there is a good deal of slippery
moral argument in this book.  There are, for example, arguments
about how taking psychotropic drugs is permissible or even a good
thing because great artists need that to raise them to a heightened
level of artistic creation.  Also, there are claims that *great*
artists are special and should not be held to the same rules as the
rest of us, else we would not have some of the great art that is so
important to us.  And, of course, Chaz's breaking the law because it
enables him to pay for good medical care for his sick son sounds
like a good rationalization to me. Although, after thinking on that
one a bit, a sick son does seem like a somewhat convenient fictional
device.

So, ask yourself, is Chaz giving good arguments for doing what it
takes to produce great art?  Or, is he just an opportunistic druggie
looking for ways and rationals for taking more drugs and taking the
money under any conditions? Or, is it somewhere in between?  And
yes, of course, it's more complicated than that, although saying
"it's more complicated" is often just a way to open the door to let
in the arguments for you wanted in the first place. Seems like an
invitation to sleaze to me.

Even the arguments about what is and is not forgery (of art) and
when that is and is not acceptable take on a complexity here that
makes them interesting.  It's definitely a fascinating read for
those of us who are interested in arguing about values. You will
learn that Chaz has been in rehab several times.  We definitely do
*not* have someone with a clean slate here.

And, what makes this subject especially interesting for me is that
value in art is to a great extent not founded on objective judgment.
Obviously, skill matters, and there are forms of art that cannot be
created without high levels of skill and training.  Yet, there are
many more skilled artists than great ones.  For me (I'm a computer
programmer) this is especially fascinating, since it is so different
from my work.  I am used to judging my work (my code, the programs I
write) by (1) whether it is bug free and (2) whether others use it
(it's useful).  The evaluations are much more clear and definite.

Also of interest to me in this book is what it has to say about the
modern art gallery system for the promotion and sale (and hyping) of
works of art.  That system is somewhat recent in history, isn't it?
It came out of the salon system in Paris and London perhaps.  It's
fascinating to learn something about how gallery owners and sales
people attract customers and convince them to buy, how the sale of
works of art is driven so much by the attempt to make a profit from
rising monetary values of works of art, and even how those operating
in the gallery system attempt to drive up the prices of the art they
sell.

Certainly the broader distribution of wealth in the Netherlands
during the 16th and 17th centuries along with the increased demand
for fine art paintings as well as other form of art and crafts had
something to do with this development.  And, so too did the
Impressionist movement and the attempt of those in it to break away
from the salon system in Paris and to offer their paintings through
smaller, independent galleries.

By the way, the requirement that an artist "do the gallery shows"
and shmooze with potential purchasers (investors?) seems a lot like
the requirement that the author of a newly published book "go on the
book tour circuit" and that s/he perform on radio talk show
interviews and attend book sales at book stores.

In spite of all Chaz's faults and weaknesses (perhaps even because
of them) you will I believe, feel compelled to follow Chaz through
to the book's ending.  He does, after all, strive for something
greater (producing great art) and for a higher, even a transcendent
vision of what art should be and do.  That's part of what makes him
a very interesting character.  Although I do find myself
frustratingly muttering to myself: Why doesn't he just do "fine art"
evenings and weekends and do commercial, hack work during the week?
But, that would make a much less interesting book.

11/07/2011

.. vim:ft=rst:fo+=a: