It’s a good question. Is there anything intrinsically worth paying money for about art? I mean, there are things that cost a lot of money simply because they take a lot of money to make; and aeroplane, for instance, or complex bit of software. That’s what I would consider intrinsic value, as it takes a lot of effort to get that product to market.

Most art, however, with the exception of films (and let’s be honest, most of them are pretty bad as art), is pretty cheap. I know, it’s not the usual perspective on art, but you can make an album for under $5000 these days. And things like that.

I think that the record companies realised that modern music especially has a low to-market cost and therefore should not cost much money, not really, as music is a basic human thing. People will keep making music, even if it’s given out for free.

Record companies, then, exist to foster two things: scarcity and cults of personality. Scarcity (in the form of physical distribution) makes an item more valuable to a potential buyer. A cult of personality makes an item more valuable because the more people in the cult, the larger the potential buyer pool.

Tags: art, music, ruminations