Source: An artist in Crypto by Wendi Yan and in discussion with Wendi
What makes something “art” comes from its intention. How did the artist create the work? What is the personal experience or historical question their art responds to? Or did they seek to evoke certain emotions through their work?
In this sense, art is a form of derivative intentionality where the artist imparts it into the work. Is generative art still art? I still think so. You just have a fancier paintbrush.
True art doesn’t care to be appreciated, obsessed over with, or owned. It holds a certain self-respect that knows enough of its own value to not plea for attention.
True art is like a gift. They should not be explicitly marked with a monetary value. They should not be used as holds of value to be predicted and sold. “If art is important to you, you want to hold onto it, instead of trading it with others.”
# On Crypto Art
Has a lot of money in it right now but most (keyword: most) of the ‘value’ derived is from speculation and not necessarily new ways of exploring the medium or good/interesting art.
Yet, this new form of ‘art’ still carries the burden of its past. Crypto art still has not solved the curation problem. There is so much art (just take a look at open sea). How does one ensure their art is discovered, other than pleading to the whims of Twitter and to constantly blast their work in hopes that someone will pay attention?
# Art as entertainment
Most of what the crypto world calls art is entertainment. They snatch your attention. They care more about making a tweet or a headline declaring they SOLD OUT, they set a HISTORICAL RECORD, and they tell you this is the art’s value.
Situated at the top of the pace layers, true art should be much lower.