[Dixielandjazz] Re: Art & Jazz & Audience

[Steven Holzer]

The fact that Vincent Van Gogh's audience was late in developing does 
not change the fact that he ultimately had one. A person who considers 
himslf an "artist" may certainly do so on the strength of his own 
reaction to his own work. The true significance of the "artist", 
however, will only be known when the effect of his work on a wider 
audience can be gauged.

Stephen Barbone wrote:

>>From: Steven Holzer <slholzer at iquest.net> (polite snip)
>>
>>Even if the audience consists only of the artist, art still depends on
>>the audience. A better question is whether art that appeals only to the
>>audience of one has any significance to the greater world.  I submit
>>that it does not.
>>    
>>
>
>Careful., now.
>
>Vincent Van Gogh had virtually no audience while he was alive yet he continued to
>paint. I believe during his life he sold one painting for a very small amount of
>money to someone who felt sorry for him, and his work which was roundly vilified
>back then.
>
>Now a century or so later we find his paintings selling for upwards of 100 million
>dollars each when ever they come to market.
>
>Was it art when nobody but him liked it? 
>  
>