Two evenings ago, at dinner, my son asked an amazing question
for his ten years.
Samuel asked, “If someone broke into your studio and only
stole a single painting, would you be angry or flattered?”
I didn’t know how to respond. It has taken two days of reflection, just to
piece together a plausible answer. What
I believe differentiates me as an artist as opposed to a hobbyist is my ability
to perfectly recreate my own vision, on demand. With that in-mind, one could say that art must
command a uniqueness that can only be effortlessly recreated by the original
artist. In other words, for art to be
true it cannot live as a single one-off of material possession. While it may never actually enter the process
of duplication or regeneration by the artist, the capacity must exist during
the life of the artist for it to have value.
Not monetary value, because that is nothing more than a reflection of fashionable
hive-type thought. Van Gogh’s work does
not have inherent value if his contemporary markets are to be set-up as a reputable
marker for success.
With that in mind, the only plausible answer is that one cannot
take art from an artist, if someone could take my art, than that would nullify
the fact that I am an artist. A thief
can only steal the physicality of the item from the business entity purposed
for selling the idea.
I would have no ethical reason to feel cheated, because my
art would still exist. My only
reasonable response is to be flattered.
-North
