What do you think?
Rate this book
Historical Materialism #94
Art and Value: Arts Economic Exceptionalism in Classical, Neoclassical and Marxist Economics
Shortlisted for the 2015 Deutscher Memorial Prize.
Art and Value is the first comprehensive analysis of art's political economy to be found in classical, neoclassical and Marxist economics. It provides a critical-historical survey of the theories of art's economic exceptionalism, of art as a merit good, and of the theories of art's commodification, the culture industry and real subsumption.
Key debates on the economics of art, from the high prices artworks fetch at auction, to the controversies over public subsidy of the arts, the 'cost disease' of artistic production, and neoliberal and post-Marxist theories of art's incorporation into capitalism, are examined in detail.
Through this exacting critique of mainstream and Marxist theories of art's economics, the book arrives at a new and highly origianl Marxist theory of art's economic exceptionalism.
Art and Value is the first comprehensive analysis of art's political economy to be found in classical, neoclassical and Marxist economics. It provides a critical-historical survey of the theories of art's economic exceptionalism, of art as a merit good, and of the theories of art's commodification, the culture industry and real subsumption.
Key debates on the economics of art, from the high prices artworks fetch at auction, to the controversies over public subsidy of the arts, the 'cost disease' of artistic production, and neoliberal and post-Marxist theories of art's incorporation into capitalism, are examined in detail.
Through this exacting critique of mainstream and Marxist theories of art's economics, the book arrives at a new and highly origianl Marxist theory of art's economic exceptionalism.
392 pages, Paperback
First published February 17, 2015
12 people are currently reading
252 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 8, 2017
This book is really ambitious, so if it doesn't exactly deliver what it's argument promises is not as big a problem as it might be made out for. In fact Beech's criticism of classical, neo-classical and neo-liberal (cultural economics) discourses on art and culture's value in regard to capitalist value system is highly illuminating, and serves well as an introduction to imperialism of economics. He makes clear how economics has become the all encompassing pseudo-science so many people currently see it as being. As economics undermines all the cultures that don't work like homo economicus, it is less and less credible as science and more and more dangerous as political ideology.
Still Beech's critique of "traditional" western Marxist positions take on the question (Lukács, Adorno & Horkheimer, SI, post-Operaismo, Baudrillard, Jameson...) is not as convincing. This is because he is stuck with rather orthodox reading of Marx's critique of labour theory of value, that takes as it's point of departure from production of value form - not so much from the commodity form (Western Marxism's point of departure). Production of art might not be structurally at heart of Capitalist production model in Marx's sense and in his time (worker sells his work force to capitalist who owns the means of production), but as this is model has become more and more marginal in the wealthy West after digital revolution and the turn to immaterial production, this contradicts his reading. Post-Fordism in general is not as marginal problem, as Beech implies. In fact Beech might do well to consult those theorists he dismisses to break from this impasse, because it is exactly the commodity fetishism and commodity form at large that has served as a way out of this productionist model for many Marxist thinkers of late. Good read still.
Still Beech's critique of "traditional" western Marxist positions take on the question (Lukács, Adorno & Horkheimer, SI, post-Operaismo, Baudrillard, Jameson...) is not as convincing. This is because he is stuck with rather orthodox reading of Marx's critique of labour theory of value, that takes as it's point of departure from production of value form - not so much from the commodity form (Western Marxism's point of departure). Production of art might not be structurally at heart of Capitalist production model in Marx's sense and in his time (worker sells his work force to capitalist who owns the means of production), but as this is model has become more and more marginal in the wealthy West after digital revolution and the turn to immaterial production, this contradicts his reading. Post-Fordism in general is not as marginal problem, as Beech implies. In fact Beech might do well to consult those theorists he dismisses to break from this impasse, because it is exactly the commodity fetishism and commodity form at large that has served as a way out of this productionist model for many Marxist thinkers of late. Good read still.
Displaying 1 of 1 review