Changes in art: market forces or evolution? A response to Colin Martindale
Article
Dickins, T. 2009. Changes in art: market forces or evolution? A response to Colin Martindale. Empirical Studies of the Arts. 27 (2), pp. 159-165. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.27.2.g
Type | Article |
---|---|
Title | Changes in art: market forces or evolution? A response to Colin Martindale |
Authors | Dickins, T. |
Abstract | Colin Martindale has presented the case for the end of art based on an evolutionary argument that invokes the need for representation and novelty as the key selection pressures. Art is hopelessly doomed to use up novelty and so render itself extinct. In this response I take issue with Martindale's use of evolutionary theory and then with his notion of novelty. I conclude that a better conceptual framework might be that of the market and of game theory. To begin with, however, I briefly outline evolutionary theory in order to lay the groundwork for subsequent arguments. |
Research Group | Behavioural Biology group |
Publisher | Baywood Publishing |
Journal | Empirical Studies of the Arts |
ISSN | 0276-2374 |
Electronic | 1541-4493 |
Publication process dates | |
Deposited | 06 Nov 2012 |
Output status | Published |
Accepted author manuscript | License |
Additional information | Citation: Dickins, T.E (2009) Changes in Art: Market Forces or Evolution? Empirical Studies of the Arts 27 (2) 159-165. |
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.27.2.g |
Language | English |
Permalink -
https://repository.mdx.ac.uk/item/83vyv
Download files
46
total views8
total downloads1
views this month0
downloads this month