In a message dated 11/14/10 10:09:18 PM, [email protected] writes:
> A commodity is something whose exchange value is greater than its use
> value -
> part of this imbalance is sustained by commodity fetishism in which we
> attribute status or well being to things
>
That would certainly apply to religious paintings. That would mean that
possibly the original premise
("Commodification of art has shaped artistic production itself and, far
from
being immune from it, artists have grappled with alienation since the
middle
of the 19th century at least.") was not clearly thought out,since if
alienation and commodification go hand in hand,then commodification of
religious paintings would alienate their makers of any period. What is supposed
to
be the meaning of alienation in this quoted statement?
Kate Sullivan
