The texts question the value system of the art market.

It's an old topic, introduced firstly by Marx who

failed in adapting the art market to the value system of capitalism based on the time at work.

Lana Esslet's position is ironic when it comes to the argument that humans have an inherent capacity to
deal with (appreciate) art, but she still defends art as a productive tool to build (encourage) independent
thinking and a better understanding of our political system in order to avoid authoritarianism.

The creative class is thus necessary to the development of our society. Even though Art could be seen as
a repetition of the present capitalist system, its effect goes beyond the economy and affects our way of
thinking. This is why its value system is difficult to rationalize.

On the contrary, Seth North relies on the inherent capacity of humans to connect with art both in their
collective or personal relationships. He writes about the potential of art being widely under-estimated in
comparison to other sciences. In his opinion, if an investigation was made about the effect of art in
society, its investment would be obvious.

Heather Charlton sees also the artwork as the expression of the inherent sense of aesthetic in mankind.
For the author, art presents itself firstly as a symbol - which gives access to the basis (essence) of
sociability – and then as a commodity. It would only be since the symbol integrates the market
(according to the text, seen as a more concrete and ritualized form of exchange) that art emphasizes its
social role in community and thus reinforces self-confidence and self-consciousness of the group.

In my mind it is kind of (quite) paradoxical. It legitimizes the productivity of art in community by its
marketization while at the beginning of the text its role was described as obvious due to genetic and
inherent in human kind.

What could look less inherent and less legitimate is the market in itself. We could say that the power of
a symbol is enough to generate rituals and build communities. The market is just another symbol and
not a materialization or a more concrete shape of an abstract idea.

Mike Konecki encourages to celebrate art as the common sensibility which connects human beings with
each other while he also encourages to use the power that art has to decode /depict how norms are
constructed.