Skip to content
Per qualsiasi informazione non esitare: chiama al 02 8295 2894
Spedizione gratuita per ordini superiori a € 25
Condividi et impera

Share and conquer



I continue the reasoning started in a previous post, "An image will bury us", on the effects of this new reality that overwhelms us with images. Who hasn't read it find it here.

Together with the indigestion of images, the internet has brought with it new possible functions of social relations.

For those who work with the "approval" of the public, power, politics and commerce and therefore also partially for art, new horizons have opened up.

It is a pity that the artists have not yet noticed it, but hope, as is well known, dies last.

The politician, the merchant, etc. they can get a precise idea of what the public likes and act accordingly. The costs are not insignificant, but less and less than the now ancient "market surveys" and "surveys" and are much more reliable.

Politicians in the first place, with our money, have not lost the opportunity and in fact today the politician does not say what he deems right or exposes a necessary government action, but only says what people want to hear.

Not only.

In part, you can guide tastes and opinions, working both on social media, and on the media and search engines. Thus, people who want to form an opinion on the internet will form the opinion I want and the game is half done.

Let's go back to art.

How can I use such a system to my advantage?

Let's take an example whose references are purely intentional and real.

An artist, first of all, must have a "mythical" image. They knew it well since the time of Mark Twain who wrote the tasty comedy "The Adventures of a Dead Artist", where an artist pretends to be dead and his sales and approval from scratch pass to great success.

Thus a name is created, but the artist never appears. It is there but you can't see it. Like Mina or the last Baptists. It is not even known if it is one or a group rather than a single artist.

Prepared for the mysterious artist, we choose a type of "popular" art, because the painting is already a medium-high level interest.

Graffiti artist. It tastes of youth, of protest, of a stranger to the circuits of art, of disobedience. The problem of the impossibility of moving a wall, to expose it here and there, is brilliantly solved with photos and prints that, through social media and online media, are perfectly compatible.

Now let's think about the message, or rather the artist's poetics.

For the contents there is no problem: just say what people want to hear, something on which it is almost impossible not to agree.

No to war, yes to love and brotherhood, let's protect and give space to childhood, and so on. Recently a nice tribute to the nurses: they are the real heroes. And who can say otherwise?


Photographs processed with stencil (such as the portrait of Che Guevara on the t-shirts, so to speak), quick to report on the walls for which prior approval is obtained. (It's okay to be disobedient, but pretend, otherwise they cancel my job and make my life difficult)

One last step remains.

Having the "status" of art. And this can only be released by the restricted circuit of extremely wealthy collectors (and today quite ignorant, as the art critic Marco Meneguzzi says in his tasty book), museums, metered critics and some VIP galleries.

Well, in museums we exhibit photocopy prints of the various subjects. We organize every time a theft or attempted theft and the attention of the media is guaranteed.

We can also sell a copy of one of the subjects at auction and self-destruct it ... in the middle, otherwise there will be problems with collection.

Nothing new mind you, even Jean Tinguely in the 60s created machines that self-destruct with fire, but he did it seriously. And the remaining pieces were given to the public as a souvenir. Consistency of other times.

There must also be a nice name, easy, easy to remember along the lines of the corporate "brands". Like "Banksy". Yes, I'd say it's perfect.

Here is a brief illustration of how to make art in this historical moment and use tools that are a problem for others.

Of course, the main objective is income, because research or the "artistic" message is quite another thing.

Final considerations of my reasoning I reserve them for my next post, since I have already written twice as recommended by the "gurus" of the web.


Previous article Claude Monet's poppy field
Next article An image will bury us

Leave a comment

Comments must be approved before appearing

* Required fields