Economics vs Art
International conference on economic culture "Economics vs Art" (58–60 Galernaya Street).
Modernity is largely determined by the rejection of classical binary oppositions of the center and periphery, depth and surface, as well as high and low. Sliding along the surface of production, ideas, values, and man himself means that economics and art no longer exist as separate phenomena. Thus, the aesthetic gesture expands into the space of economics, politics, ethics, and the economic takes a dimension and sets the standard for beauty. The matrix of modernity, proposed by Foucault (biology, linguistics, economics) can be rewritten through the line of tension "economics vs art."
Science and art represent different means of perceiving and describing the world. With certain reservations, it can be said that if science strives for the most objective, impartial, accurate, and verifiable reflection of reality, then the reflection of the world in art is subjective, emotional, and oriented not on a precise reproduction but on a creative refraction. However, both science and art are heterogenous and diverse, they can partially overlap and interact in relation to a specific object of cognition, and in relation to methods of cognition as well as the portrayal of the world. Economics, as a social and humanitarian discipline, in many of its aspects is closer to art than to (exact) sciences. What are the existing and promising areas of interaction between economics and art—this is one of the questions which will be discussed during the course of the conference.
Art, as a sphere is as open as possible to all those who are interested and at the same time endowed with an incredible potential to transform their culture and everyday life including the economic component, in its extreme manifestations is capable of postulating a radical rejection of capitalist relations and, on the other hand, a complete merger with the system of economic exchange. Among artists of the last two centuries there were those who consistently strove for non-covetousness, and those who considered art to be an ideal sphere of entrepreneurship. At the same time, the nonpossessors subsequent capitalization of art often breaks records set by those who, by all means possible, achieved financial success during their lifetime. Art defines its own boundaries in the dialogue with economics and thus reveals the symbolic nature of economics. Unbelievable prices for works that reduce the artistic experience to a minimum is an interesting phenomenon, which makes art attractive for large businesses. This range of problems would also be useful to discuss within the conference.
The current topic involves an entire set of empirical questions related to various aspects of the interrelation of economics and art as two specific spheres of activity:
- Which economic problems arise in connection with art and how are they resolved (pricing in art markets, financing of art projects and art education, etc.)?
- How and by what principles do art objects become an object of capitalization and investment?
- What is the impact of the artistic sphere (art practices, artistic thinking and perception, an artist's way of life, etc.) on economic activity (its goals, motivation, attractiveness, etc.)?
- To what extent is it permissible to apply artistic (aesthetic) criteria to assess the viability of economic activity—and conversely, within what boundaries is the use of economic criteria justified in assessing artistic projects, practices, and works?
Furthermore, it is interesting to pose a question of philosophical, essential nature, which could be formulated in the following manner: what radical changes in the meaning of economics and art in their traditional understanding lead to the interrelationship of these two spheres, which can be assessed as the most characteristic for the present day? Has Baudrillard's abovementioned diagnosis about our era as the "aesthetic stage of political economy" been confirmed, and if so, to what extent?
Areas of focus
- Economics: Science or Art
- Ethics of Economics: Why not Aesthetics?
- Aestheticization of Economics: Pros and Cons
- Is it Possible to Speak about Economic Styles (Classic, Baroque, Romanticism, Modern, etc.)?
- Economics from the Point of View of Shocking Aesthetics
- Economics as a Technology and Economics as an Art
- Is the Aesthetic Education of an Economic Individual Necessary?
- Art of Resisting Economic Violence
- Economic Utopia as a Literary Style
- Affective and Rational in Economics and Art
- Abundance and Deficiency in Economics and Art
- Economics and Art as an Area of Visibility (Ghosts, Simulacra, Fetishes, "Effects," Images in Economics and Art)
- Artist as an Entrepreneur—Entrepreneur as an Artist
- Auction Houses and the Pricing of Art Objects
- Galleries and Contemporary Artists
- Symbolic Dimensions of Art and Economics
- Non-covetousness in Art and Economics
- Curator as a Mediator between Art and the Business World
- Collecting Works of Art and Capitalization
- Art Markets (Theater, Music, Cinema)
- Digitalization in Art and Its Economic Aspects
- Opera in the Sphere of Economics
- Beautiful and Sublime in Economics. Inconvertible Image
- Translation: Economics, Art