Curating Capitalism: Timeline in Art and Economy
Gülnihal Öztürk, one of our writers, talks about the complex relationship between art and economy.
There is a complex historical parallelism between art and economy. This parallelism does not progress on a single plane; it depends on an organic timeline. Although it has yet to be discovered precisely when one fully adapts to the other, we can see that the period’s art, business world and economy follow each other in historical analyses.
In ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, works of art often reflected religious or royal power. In the same period, the development of trade routes brought about economic changes. So, was art influenced by the economy? Economy or art?
In Europe in the Middle Ages, the church was an essential supporter of art, and the economy of that period was generally based on the feudal system. In this period, it was at the mercy of the rulers to protect and glorify the artist. Since art also developed a political aspect, Turkish poetry tried to survive in this direction. Those who could be shaped around art moved closer to the light and stepped into the Renaissance.
Art gained importance in the economic context with the Renaissance by emphasising individual talent and creativity. The revival of trade allowed art to reach a wider audience. During this period, it was decided that industry and art were the most profitable investments. Art experienced its most affluent age during the Renaissance. The path of the rise and development as a whole, leading to a well-founded development, is also very much in line with the construction phase of the works of the period.
When I think of the Industrial Revolution, Charlie Chaplin’s film “Modern Times” comes to mind. With technological progress and industrialisation, art deals with issues involving the reflections of society in more diverse ways. The most profitable sector of the industry is the film industry. In a way, it has also increased accessibility to art. The rise of 20th-century modern art emerged as a reaction to economic and social changes. According to Joseph Beuys’ vision, art is equal to capital. Therefore, art and the artist inspire the business world and, thus, the economy.
French scientist Bruno Latour turned to curate because he saw exhibitions as a field of research. He prefers to make observations that can be applied if a good result is obtained instead of the information given in business faculties. This shows that he finds curating applicable in every field. The inspiring aspect of art has also been applied to capitalist teachings.
Today, the relationship between art and economy has become more complex due to globalisation, technological advances and digital media. The digital economy started before digital art. We began to be able to follow the economy from the panels, as well as changes in currencies and stock exchange transactions quickly in digital ways. As technology progressed, art produced using digital methods also started to move. Somewhere in the meantime, a market for digital currencies emerged.
NFT transfers also progressed along with the artworks sold in global markets with the digital economy. With every progress, there may be periods of stagnation. Did digital currencies here cause the pause? Or is it because we have yet to get used to NFT as much as the art we have experienced concretely? It is possible to predict that it will rise in the coming periods, but it is difficult to predict the timing. We continue our organic progress during this period by digitalising in the artistic and economic fields. The question is: is the economy inspired by art, or is art inspired by the economy? Is it possible to say this exactly? This issue will always continue to spiral. It is like travelling in time within themselves.
GÜLNİHAL ÖZTÜRK
NFTIFY
This article was first published in Turkish on NFTIFY.com.tr and translated into English by NFTIFY.uk .
