"Art" for Sale.

MNartists just posted an interesting article by Jay Orff on the broader implications of the "art" for sale in big box stores like Target.  I admit, the article was kind of a let-down; but that's only because I get way too impassioned about this specific topic.  I say "impassioned", the significant other might say "rabid" or "imbued with an unholy berserker fury"; and I was a little bummed when the author didn't share my unhealthy rage.

Don't misread,- I'm all for reproductions.  They're the only way I can have a Mucha on my wall.  But you don't see Mucha for sale in Target, or Titian, or Cezanne.  Hell, I don't think I've even seen the darling of the reproduction business Van Gogh at a big box store, unless it was on a toaster or some shit.

I want a piece that says "I love cats, comfort, and am dimly aware of art."  zazzle

What you get in home decor sections are, as the article puts it, "cheap knock-offs".

 "...the first thing I noticed when I stopped by my neighborhood’s iteration of the big box store was that all of the decorative art for sale at Target references fine art; that is, it’s meant to look like, or at least remind you of other fine art. In a sense, the art works Target sells are knock-offs, in the same way their cheap chinos are knock-offs of those you might find at The Gap or J. Crew..." 

I'm not entirely sure why this is.  You'd think buying the right to print some famous piece of art would be negligible in comparison with how many people would buy the crap out of anything you slapped it on.

Exhibit A.      Amazon

Maybe museums exercise discretion in who they allow to make reproductions, in which case, kudos to them.  Maybe they're just greedy bastards who want to monopolize the Goya snowglobe market.

...actually I would totally buy that.

Go figure.  At any rate, plundering the artistic corpse of long-dead masters to better hawk your sweatshop yields doesn't really bother me.  Mostly, I think, because it's so flagrantly crass.  Art, especially classic art, is synonymous with the bourgeoisie.  And we all know nothing says class like a cheaply-made bathroom scale with a sticker of one of Michelangelo's frescoes on it.  Nobody is being fooled into thinking you're a connoisseur.  And there actually might be something delightfully irreverent about it.  A hipster irony, if you will.

Yes I just took the time to make this.

No, what sets me a-foaming is the intent to trick the uninitiated into buying some "art".  Big box stores do not sell art.  They sell frames and canvases with incredibly low-quality photocopies in/on them.  Art implies creation, and it's interesting how rarely, if ever, someone is credited with creating these things.

You know what would help me swallow yall calling it "art" three times?  An artist.
Screenshot from Target.com

Someone had to make the original.  But I'm guessing "credited artist" pays more than "faceless production person".

Art needs an Artist.

Then there are the prices.  As said before, it's all painfully inferior stuff; and that's not looking at artistic quality, oh no.  We're just looking at the physical condition of the materials: frames, canvases, mats, etc.  It's all excruciatingly substandard.  Which is totally fine, provided the prices reflect that.  What the prices actually reflect, however, is the notion that art is valuable.  That this cheap-ass frame,- which cost fifteen cents to make and I can buy one aisle over for full retail value at $5.99,- is not the thing of value; it's the art within that I'm paying $39.00 for.

$39.00.  Seriously, Target.

But there is no art within.  It's not even a print.  It's a crappy photocopy of exactly the same quality as those filler photos of families playing tennis you throw away when you buy a new frame.

What most people fail to realize, and what these asshole corporations are cashing in on, is that tacking the word "art" onto something does not automatically increase it's value tenfold.  Here's a quick quiz to show you where the value of art lies.

A Picasso is worth the gross national product of Uruguay because 

A) it is a flawless demonstration of artistic ability and skill.

B) it's a fucking Picasso.

If you answered A, congratulations, you take the art establishment way more seriously than it takes itself.  The Proverbial Picasso, as a purely aesthetic piece, is worth as much as you are willing to pay to look at it.  The Proverbial Picasso, as it exists in the world, is worth as much as you are willing to pay to say that you own a Picasso.  It's a subtle difference.  Putting a big sign that says "art" over an aisle does not justify a 1000% markup.

You know what, I need to stop.  I'm getting all riled up.  Maybe I'll address all the other issues I have with this crap later.