[p2p-research] the abundance of art

Sun May 3 14:05:11 CEST 2009

yes...... but I'm speaking about exact replication down to the atomic scale
and how such perfect copies of physical art (apparently not digital art as
copies of a digital work are treated equally as the original digital work)
will always embody some kind of uniqueness, originality and an emotional
value.

So ... why? Why do we seek scarcity (uniqueness, rarity) ? It's instilled in
us.

It's not intrinsic to the money. We made the money. And it's not intrinsic
to nature either as natural evolution is taking us to a stateof existence
where everything (physical and digital) can be copied (identically) and
distributed freely.

So ... why?

Why do _WE_ enforce (or seek to have) scarcity?

That is my question.

On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 4:57 AM, <paola.dimaio at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> "it" IS all MIND
>
>
> possibly. But all the pain, the personal sacrifice, the effort, the time,
> the frustration, the suffering that go into creating a piece of reality that
> did not exist before, make in my eye an object unique and thus worthy of
> such, and a copy will always be a copy of that
>
> Once a friend of mine, great creative genius and profoundly disturbed, used
> to make a piece of art of any object he touched. He polished roots of trees
> picked up by reiversides and made the most beautiful ornaments and artifacts
> of them, for example. But given the amount of work required for each, their
> true price would have been too high to be sellable,so he only gave his works
> of art away or destroyed them after creation when he had nowhere to store
> them and nobody to give them to, while making a living with temp jobs like
> pushing trolleys in hospitals and sweeping streets for the city council.
> a great person, and a self declared madman by choice.
>
>  He once punched a clock into pieces, and disassembled every single piece
> to single components, then stuck them onto a canvass with glue rearranging
> them into a pattern that suited him better
>
>  it was amazing. not that anyone couldnt  do the same, but it would be a
> different clock, a different assembly pattern. a different reason for
> punching it down, and the result would be a differently unique piece.
>
> it could well all be in the mind though
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 2:38 AM, <paola.dimaio at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> and you see you what I mean?  The light reflecting from a [future]
>>>> perfect replica will be exactly the same as the light reflecting from the
>>>> original from all angles and degrees... so why would the original be more
>>>> vauable. It's human nature
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think I know what you mean, that due to our human nature we attach a
>>> higher value to an original, than to its copies even when absolutely
>>> perfectly the same.
>>>
>>> For me though, an original piece of art is not just the product, the
>>> exterior visible shape that we can see, but an intention, a 'first' a
>>> breakthrough of logical scheme perhaps, a step that has never been taken
>>> before, a way that reality has never been conceived or seen as before, and
>>> as such ti vibrates at a unique frequency. A real original piece of art, and
>>> I have seen only a few, has an essence that is not reproducible, because it
>>> was generated by unique circumstances, in a unique space/time conjunction,
>>> which was expressed in a unique/unprecedented brilliant form, and captured
>>> sculpted or painted and will stay there forever. So what I am trying to say
>>> is that the original and the copy are definitely not the same for me, even
>>> when the latter is perfect. I would be interested to  explore the
>>> possibility that its all in the mind though.
>>>
>>> Abundance is perhaps donating it to a foundation, making it accessible
>>> free of charge to everyone forever and having chairs next to it so that
>>> people can actually sit nearby, and allowing copies to be made and
>>> circulated.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 2:03 AM, <paola.dimaio at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that, despite art itself being intrinsically abundant, the
>>>>> physical products of 'high art' (not the digital product), e.g. a Picasso
>>>>> painting, are given some kind of scarce quality by people (a spiritual,
>>>>> emotional or superstitious value) that makes them rare (or special) even if
>>>>> they can be replicated ad infinitum and in an exact manner .
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> actually, I am not sure about replicability
>>>> Having seen a few original masterpieces, and their copies, a very
>>>> special energy and strenght emanates from the former
>>>> My definition of a work of art is that it is a unique, and communicates
>>>> some unique in a unique way
>>>>
>>>> this is why, I think, they are placed in public galleries where everyone
>>>> can enjoy them,  I will be interested in contrasting abundance vs uniqueness
>>>> in art, and maybe we could organise an exhibition one day about it
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Definitely related to p2p. The issue of why we create artificial
>>>>> scarcity or why we seek it is core to the p2p economy.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 5:54 PM, <paola.dimaio at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> oh yes, found it
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (sorry if not directly relevant to p2p, but definitely
>>>>>> a collective, and part of the commons imho)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> just for completeness
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the one i saw in Germany years ago was the Prinzhorn collection
>>>>>> http://www.prinzhorn.uni-hd.de/beispiele/himmel_eng.shtml
>>>>>>
>>>>>> discussed here  in a broader context
>>>>>> http://www.gseart.com/exhibitions.asp?ExhID=455
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 1:35 AM, <paola.dimaio at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I saw an exhibition about ten year or so ago, not sure where
>>>>>>> but I seem to remember Germany, there is also an exhibition book
>>>>>>> going around,
>>>>>>> it was the most beautiful art work made by psychiatric patients
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not sure its the same or just similar
>>>>>>> but its on in London, lots of interesting links also to be found on
>>>>>>> the web
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.wellcomecollection.org/press/2009/WTX053734.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Even if your,re clinically insane you can make great art
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Paola Di Maio,
>>>>>> ****************************************
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Marc Fawzi
>>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>>>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Paola Di Maio,
>>>> ****************************************
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Marc Fawzi
>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Paola Di Maio,
>>> ****************************************
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Marc Fawzi
>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Paola Di Maio,
> ****************************************
>
>

-- 

Marc Fawzi
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090503/c7730157/attachment-0001.html>