MBA CENTRAL APTITUDE QUIZ-11
Verbal:
By its very nature, the market for art reflects the relationship between art and society. Markets, as demand driven entities, have existed and been created by societies, for societies, since the early ages. Studying the art market over the last four hundred years reveals no exceptions. The art market has evolved with the changing relationship between art and society. An integral part of this relationship is, in turn, the relationship between artist and society.
During the Renaissance and Baroque periods, the artist was regarded as a craftsman. Patronage from a single patron or church was common and subject matter was restricted. Art served more of a defined purpose - either strictly religious or plainly decorative. Therefore, the artist regarded himself as inclined to the side of trade and commerce, with realistic and more simplistic goals - that of earning a decent living. The artist ran his workshop in much the same way a proprietor or sole-trader would run his business. In this sense, the artist's consideration of art marketing was integral to its creation, as were sensible business practices and efficient production to facilitate demand.
It is for these reasons that the artists of the Renaissance and Baroque were able to consider and conduct marketing and business practices transparently. This transparency can be traced to the relationship between art and society at the time. Artwork in itself was not perceived to be enlightening or empowering. Although it often carried religious connotations, art was not the object of significance, but a way of seeing. As a result, those who created it were not regarded as genius and consequently not iconised by society. Rather, artists earned respect and money for their skills as craftsmen. It is also interesting to note that around this period, the notion of artist as icon begins to emerge as growing workshops, the professional dealer and art fairs gain importance.
The change in the role of artist from craftsman to icon was influenced by several factors - the first art fairs, exhibitions, auctions and markets, the emergence of professional dealers and the increase in collectors. These factors helped lead to the gradual commodification of art.
The 'popularisation' of art was led by many changes that plot the emergence of artist as icon. The proliferation of fairs and markets exposed art to the common people more than any single dealer could. Art began to merge with popular culture and the work of individual artists began to be recognised. Dealers were instrumental in introducing art to the upper middle classes before art fairs and markets appeared. Dealers helped change the relationship between artist and buyer from artist-patron to artist-client. Although the first dealers were not much more than enterprising shop-keepers – history speaks of their sly, exploitative demeanour; they were to become pivotal in changing the role of the artist. The emergence of these markets and the professional dealer were signs that art had entered the public domain and that individual artists had captured the interest of the public.
Artist as icon created a new breed of collectors. As individual artists like Rembrandt, Cezanne, Van Gogh and Picasso grew famous, collecting art became as fashionable as the artists themselves. The collectors gave artists their iconic status, and in return artists gave collectors self-indulgence, security, ownership and identity. Artist as icon served the market as much as it served the artist. As collectors' tastes changed in a fashion cultured by dealers and critics, artists were left alone and no longer in control of their work. The artist as icon today is plagued by the public perception of genius - that the artist must pursue art for moral and enlightening purposes; that the artist is genius only by suffering, self-realisation or torture. The artist as icon today cannot consider profit, money or even making a living. Wishing for a nice house, even
studio is seen as 'not pursuant to the cause' or immoral. Even consider marketing and business practices today.
Verbal:
By its very nature, the market for art reflects the relationship between art and society. Markets, as demand driven entities, have existed and been created by societies, for societies, since the early ages. Studying the art market over the last four hundred years reveals no exceptions. The art market has evolved with the changing relationship between art and society. An integral part of this relationship is, in turn, the relationship between artist and society.
During the Renaissance and Baroque periods, the artist was regarded as a craftsman. Patronage from a single patron or church was common and subject matter was restricted. Art served more of a defined purpose - either strictly religious or plainly decorative. Therefore, the artist regarded himself as inclined to the side of trade and commerce, with realistic and more simplistic goals - that of earning a decent living. The artist ran his workshop in much the same way a proprietor or sole-trader would run his business. In this sense, the artist's consideration of art marketing was integral to its creation, as were sensible business practices and efficient production to facilitate demand.
It is for these reasons that the artists of the Renaissance and Baroque were able to consider and conduct marketing and business practices transparently. This transparency can be traced to the relationship between art and society at the time. Artwork in itself was not perceived to be enlightening or empowering. Although it often carried religious connotations, art was not the object of significance, but a way of seeing. As a result, those who created it were not regarded as genius and consequently not iconised by society. Rather, artists earned respect and money for their skills as craftsmen. It is also interesting to note that around this period, the notion of artist as icon begins to emerge as growing workshops, the professional dealer and art fairs gain importance.
The change in the role of artist from craftsman to icon was influenced by several factors - the first art fairs, exhibitions, auctions and markets, the emergence of professional dealers and the increase in collectors. These factors helped lead to the gradual commodification of art.
The 'popularisation' of art was led by many changes that plot the emergence of artist as icon. The proliferation of fairs and markets exposed art to the common people more than any single dealer could. Art began to merge with popular culture and the work of individual artists began to be recognised. Dealers were instrumental in introducing art to the upper middle classes before art fairs and markets appeared. Dealers helped change the relationship between artist and buyer from artist-patron to artist-client. Although the first dealers were not much more than enterprising shop-keepers – history speaks of their sly, exploitative demeanour; they were to become pivotal in changing the role of the artist. The emergence of these markets and the professional dealer were signs that art had entered the public domain and that individual artists had captured the interest of the public.
Artist as icon created a new breed of collectors. As individual artists like Rembrandt, Cezanne, Van Gogh and Picasso grew famous, collecting art became as fashionable as the artists themselves. The collectors gave artists their iconic status, and in return artists gave collectors self-indulgence, security, ownership and identity. Artist as icon served the market as much as it served the artist. As collectors' tastes changed in a fashion cultured by dealers and critics, artists were left alone and no longer in control of their work. The artist as icon today is plagued by the public perception of genius - that the artist must pursue art for moral and enlightening purposes; that the artist is genius only by suffering, self-realisation or torture. The artist as icon today cannot consider profit, money or even making a living. Wishing for a nice house, even
studio is seen as 'not pursuant to the cause' or immoral. Even consider marketing and business practices today.
Directions for questions 1 to 4: These questions are based on the following information
P, Q, R and S were four actors. A, B, C and D were the four directors who directed these actors for their movies released in a particular year. Each actor individually acted in two movies directed by two different directors and these movies were released in that particular year. The first released movies acted by the four actors were all directed by different directors. No actor’s second movie was released before any other actors first movie. All the actors’ second movies were released in the same sequence as their first movies.
The following additional facts are known.
(i) No director who directed a movie of Q, directed any movie of R.
(iii) The actor of the first released movie was Q; this movie was directed by C.
(iv) The actor of the last movie was S; this movie was directed by D.
(v) The movies directed by B were released consecutively. The number of movies released between the release of movies directed by any of other directors remains the same.
Directions for questions 1 to 4: These questions are based on the following information
P, Q, R and S were four actors. A, B, C and D were the four directors who directed these actors for their movies released in a particular year. Each actor individually acted in two movies directed by two different directors and these movies were released in that particular year. The first released movies acted by the four actors were all directed by different directors. No actor’s second movie was released before any other actors first movie. All the actors’ second movies were released in the same sequence as their first movies.
The following additional facts are known.
(i) No director who directed a movie of Q, directed any movie of R.
(iii) The actor of the first released movie was Q; this movie was directed by C.
(iv) The actor of the last movie was S; this movie was directed by D.
(v) The movies directed by B were released consecutively. The number of movies released between the release of movies directed by any of other directors remains the same.