On the Value of Life, the Market, and Art

A question I had was, how are things priced?

As any basic economics class will teach, the simplest way to price things is to use the supply and demand curve. There are other ways of pricing, such as dynamic pricing, cost-plus pricing, etc. But a question occurred to me as I thought about this: how do you price the value of a person’s life?

Should the increase in population correlate with the value of one human life? Certainly not. Should it be measured by how much a person’s time is worth? No. All human lives cost ten months of labor; should that be the price of each of us? Maybe our flesh, but our ideals and soul and wisdom and love can’t be priced as such. If an older person had more time to produce (develop) and polish their abilities and experiences, are they worth more? Still, no. So obviously, the logical ways of economic pricing don’t apply to human lives (didn’t say commodities because I suppose humans can be commodities sometimes). I concluded that the value of anything should not depend on the quantity of it, nor should it depend on the effort in making it. The value of an object can be completely subjective, it can rely on the sentiments of the owner. Therefore, the value of someone’s life is a reflection of one’s relationship to oneself, which only oneself knows what it is.

With this streamlining of thoughts as our basis, we will look at how the ways of pricing have failed to capture and promote the value of creative endeavors. It’s had a great impact on our society as we are not machines, but sentient beings with the need to express our feelings.

Pricing of the Market and Its Impact

Fundamental analysis is to use a company’s financial statements and other micro and macro-economic factors to effectively determine the intrinsic value of the stock. With the calculated value, if the current price is lower than the intrinsic value, buy; otherwise, hold. Warren Buffett was able to profit billions with this strategy. He was the student of who was named the Father of Fundamental Analysis, Benjamin Graham.

What relates fundamental analysis to the topic we are discussing is not the process of deriving the intrinsic value of a company, but the success of this theory, which believes all commodity has an intrinsic value. The intrinsic value of a company is measured by the company’s capital assets and potential growth. Because the market is naturally sensitive and fluctuates irrationally, the investor can find undervalued companies and take advantage of the opportunity.

Beyond evaluating the price of companies, financial analysts can determine the prices of financial products such as options, futures, and other financial instruments. Prices of an option are calculated by the Black-Scholes Model, and futures by the Futures Pricing Formula, and analysts are hired to optimize the prices of other financial derivatives. such as bonds, mutual funds, and others. The mention of these different financial instruments is mainly used to demonstrate how the pricing of these commodities is the basis of our economy. It affects every participant in it. For instance, when the pricing of federal bonds decreases, interest rates increase, making borrowing more expensive. Higher interest rates reduce consumer spending and could slow down inflation, since inflation is caused by the increase in demand. Additionally, 401k and pension funds also rely on the pricing of the market. Those are the retirement investments that lots of working people use to secure their financial stability when they’re retired. Inevitably, the market affects the worker’s quality of life. Outside of the market, there’s also the value of patents, copyrights, and other intellectual properties. Organ donations are also priced; half a million for a liver and a quarter of a million for a kidney. Relating to the opening thoughts, since all of the tangible and nontangible aspects of a human are priced, couldn’t we technically price the combination of a whole being?

Value of Art in a time of objective values

Here’s the thing: the very foundation that keeps the modern economy afloat is actively commodifying the arts. Using the excuse that “art is sentimental and can be sold at any price,” millionaires found loopholes to escape tax cuts, while real artists struggle to purchase paint and canvases. The questions arise: how to price art? Who is to judge the aesthetics of a piece? Does it have an intrinsic value? I’ll tell you now, no.

To put us on common ground, I use ‘art’ to refer to any creation that has a meaning beyond its utility.

Money is an abstracted concept used to marshal society to support the basic needs of our lives, but art and artists’ lives exist outside of that sphere. To price a piece of art is to draw a bridge between the artists and the audience, recognizing the fact that they, the artists, are part of society and need to be fed. The price doesn’t reflect the brilliance of the art, but the gratitude for the artist. Therefore, artificially over-inflating the price of a piece of art is to disregard the artistry and treat it like a luxury good and commodify it. The validity and sincerity of the price are in the hands of the buyer; as a spectator, one can only guess the intentions of the buyer. So in my humble opinion, the infamous duct-taped banana selling for 6.2 mil is absolutely sacrilegious. I’d even argue that those sorts of art are becoming a financial instrument! Peak capitalism behavior.

To exploit art with money is a mockery of the declivity of modern artistic integrity. And that is precisely why this piece is named The Comedian, Maurizio Cattelan (the creator) is amused by the absurdity of the world.

There’s a difference between art and craft (skill). There could be craft within an art piece, but a craft on its own cannot be art. Craft can be valued as the time of labor and the accumulated skill. But should one value art in the same way as valuing a skill or labor? Even in general, to evaluate one’s time with a price is to rob them of their livelihood, as one’s life should not be commodified. Sure, get paid $16 an hour, but that is not their worth. $100k life insurance is not the price tag of a life. It is pathetic that we collectively cannot think of a better system to survive than to objectify ourselves. And most of us can’t escape this, not even the wealthy, because they are just living off of someone else’s sacrificed life, does it not hurt their conscience?

The commodification of art is an inevitable impediment for artists to achieve true artistry on the road to the modern market. After all, it’s not surprising, is it? If you are an artist or aspiring artist, please keep doing art for art’s sake.

Thanks for reading to the end! Please subscribe, I’ll do my best to post more consistently! Please look out for more coming to your inbox in the near future. Thank you so much for sticking with me to the end. Have a great weekend!