• YungOnions@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 hours ago

        What’re you defining ‘value’? Monetary, sure but what of emotional value? What’re you defining as ‘quality’? What’s high quality art to you? What’s valuable in your view? I garuntee that’s not the same for everyone.

      • YungOnions@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        No, the value of art is specific to each individual. A picture made by someone with no talent can be of enormous value to someone because of what it means, the relationship they have with the creator, the emotions it makes them feel etc.

        Tieing value to talent suggests that a picture by someone who has trained for 5 years is somehow more ‘valuable’ than a picture by someone who has only trained for 4. Why? What metric is being used to determine ‘value’? What metric determines ‘talent’? Art is entirely subjective. To try and define it’s value is missing the point, because it means something different to everyone.

    • Jonathan Hendry@iosdev.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 hours ago

      @YungOnions

      What do you mean value?

      Emotional value? No. Many parents value their small child’s drawings.

      Market value? Mostly yes. Especially in commercial art like art commissioned for book covers. Untalented artists aren’t going to be very successful.