What's unfair is that he should be making megabucks for his work, but I can promise you that the studios do not pay him on that scale.As with all fine art. It typically is not truly recognized by the general populace for it's merits/value until long after the the authors demise. (the artist unfortunately never saw the fame and fortune the future held for them).One would think that with the digital age upon us, those who do the suffering and hard work would actually reap the long term benefits. While the $$ may not be quite as forth coming as one would hope, the seeds of respect/honor have already been sewn Good posts, both insightful and thought invoking
Well, yes and no. It's not always that the artist isn't recognized until after their death. In the past, artists such as DaVinci or Michaelangelo were certainly recognized and respected during their lifetimes, but well into the 1800s artists (even the best artists) worked on a patronage system. So, market pressures didn't really affect their work.
However, as the patronage system died (along about the time of the Industrial Revolution) there began to be a different economic structure supporting the arts. The critical value of the work, artistic merit, public interest, along with the real or perceived rarity of the artist's work all began to be important.
That's about the time that the captains of industry and the general public both began to discover fine art (other than sacred art). As that began to happen, a real market for fine art emerged. And, as in all markets, if the amount of any commodity is limited, the value goes up. So, whenever an artist is deceased, that puts a very real cap on the number of his works.
The critical value will change over time as tastes change. Same with public interest. I submit that true artistic merit remains unchanged. And an artist's work becomes more and more rare as time passes ... individual works of art are damaged or destroyed or sometimes lost. But, the end result is that, assuming critical value and rarity are high, the price of a work will increase.
And, the big problem with the digital medium is it takes a lot longer for something to become rare, especially if it is subject to easy duplication. True even after the artist has passed away. It's a given, of course, that the artist won't produce any more originals after his or her demise, but the individual works will not themselves become rare.
It's just a side effect of the digital age. However, the upside is that the general public has more and more access to some really astounding artwork. I would love to see a world where artists and musicians (and I'm not talking about pop-stars) and teachers would be compensated for the value of what they contribute to society.
Ah, if only I ran the world.
