“When did a law degree become the union card for making judgments on art?”
So asks arts writer, Daniel Grant.
As we all have seen, artwork can generate big money, and where money goes, lawyers and litigation follow. More recent lawsuits, though, are defining what art is, how it can be bought and sold, how literally to follow a donor’s wishes. The meaning of the legal term “due diligence” is far more debated these days than the Abstract Expressionist theory of “push-pull,” particularly when speaking about Abstract Expressionists.
Unfortunately, with so many artists willingly ceding interpretations to critics and lawyers, it’s no surprise ill-equipped judges are making determinations as to what is art.
Worth a read (and not just because I’m quoted).