诗可以售——论艺术实践的经济之维

Poems Could be Sold: An Economic View on Artistic Practice

现代诗学对审美实践中的“经济决定论”的否决无可置疑,但这并不意味着对有意无意贬低物质影响的“贫困诗学”给予过分强调。我们一方面有必要为既赚钱又叫好的通俗艺术的精神价值恢复名誉;另一方面也仍然得坚持,因为在市场效益与艺术价值之间的良性互动之外,还存在着市场效益与艺术价值在目标上的不同。所以说诗可以售,但不能被贱卖,不能为牟取暴利而不顾它在文化效应上的价值维度。因为归根到底,艺术的价值并不以经济效益来定夺,艺术的意义并不仅仅通过商业的成功来回报。进入市场的艺术毕竟属于一种特殊的商品。这要求每一位以“艺术”的名义进行创作的人们,都必须承担起一份道义职责,恪守社会良知的底线,在艺术实践中暂且摆脱一些功名利禄之心。

Various forms of ＂literary and artistic sociology＂, which have long been employed in figuring out the relation between art and economy, originate from the same noted hypothesis of Karl Marx on the imbalanced development between art and material production. Marx＇s theory, though explicitly demonstrated, is usually misinterpreted as ＂Economic Determinism＂, which is undoubtedly objected by thinkers backing the value of academic research. The objection of modern poetics against this point of view is unavoidable, but doesn＇t necessarily mean denying the objective impact that economy makes upon artistic practice. This impact is best illustrated as the conflict occurs between the idealism of aesthetic practice and the materialism of economic activities. This conflict gave birth to ＂Poorness Poetics＂, which means that art is nurtured in poorness. Although this assumption has been overemphasized in the history of art and literature, it is irresponsible to deny the effect of material consideration upon literature production. Art is, by all means, a way of showing gratitude for life, instead of grudge. In order to maintain this attitude of artists, it is essential to secure them a proper life standard. Therefore, poetics should in no case be free from the objective impact of worldly material production activities upon sacred artistic practice. The truth is that historically many ＂ artists＂ were identified as ＂ economic men＂. This constitutes the fundamental difference between the poets who is still living a worldly life and the Buddhist monks who are leading an ＂out-worldly＂ life. In this context, however, how should the dominant effect of material interest on artistic practice be viewed？ How should the market value of art be evaluated？ They are now known as the essential questions which challenge modern poetics. Economic activities seeking maximum profits are easily denounced as the negative reason for the dominant effect of economic consideration on art. However, it turns out that there is a commercial factor in the procedure of artistic appreciation and vise verse; appreciation appears ahead of commercial speculation. Market, as for poetics, has long been deemed a trap. Up to now, on the one hand, it is necessary to honestly admit that poems could be sold, thus rehabilitating the reputation of popular arts that are both profitable and of high artistic value. On the other hand, aside from keeping the positive interaction between market value and artistic value, it is essential to hold that market and art are distinct from each other in their goals. It is not simply the market but the talents and attitude of artists that are responsible for problems occurring in artistic practice. In a word, the value of art is not determined only by economic profit or rewarded by commercial success. The consumption of artistic products is different from the consumption of common goods, because the artistic value is realized not through material possession but through spiritual communication. Poems could be sold, so to speak, and it is the rights of artists to gain property through artistic production. Meanwhile, poems should not be sold cheaply, nor just for seeking improper profits while ignoring their cultural value. For the meaningfulness of art is not in momentary entertaining, but in the building of culture. After all, artistic products in the market are a special type of commodity. fore, it is required that all those engaged in artistic production under the name of art shoul take ethical responsibilities, faithfully keep the bottom line for a social conscience, an rarily shake off their pursuit for money and fame during their artistic practice.