Good article. I was just earlier reading an article on this exact topic. The artist made this statement, with which I agree:
As I've mentioned previously, a piece of art has integrity when it represents the artist's values. The artwork that sells results from the standards of the buyer and/or the majority. Additionally, the artwork that sells also reflects the political environment, as art is highly regulated (e.g., via copyright laws). So when you look at what artists are creating, and when you look at what art is selling (and the prices they are selling at), you can gain a good understanding of how the mainstream views reality.My line of reasoning is very simple: MOMA is one of the most respected institutions of art worldwide, and it is a reflection of American society's culture. In fact, I think art is a great reflection of a society's philosophy. What does this imply from a philosophical perspective? Do you think that with such a low level of realism at perceiving reality we can thrive as individuals?
I agree too. I tried to post a comment on the article you referenced, but would have needed to login -- and I have reached my limit of joining things. As a mentioned to fuffle above, I've decided to write a follow up article to elaborate my position. I'd be interested in you're comments when I post. Like Clarisse88, I believe that is issue has rather larger ramifications than artistic taste.