Summary
The article expresses gratitude towards financial benefactors who support artists, acknowledging the necessity of funding for the creation of art despite personal misgivings about the source of their wealth.
Abstract
In an imperfect world where art requires financial support, the author reflects on the role of wealthy patrons in sustaining artists and their work. While the author harbors reservations about the origins of these patrons' wealth, labeled as "blood money," they concede that without such support, artists would struggle to find the time, space, and resources necessary to create. The piece, titled "We Should Probably Thank Those Damn Money Men," is part of a series called "One Hundred Days of Gratitude," and it recognizes the paradoxical relationship between art and commerce, emphasizing that even with negative feelings towards the patrons, their contributions to the arts deserve recognition and thanks.
Opinions
- The author acknowledges the necessity of financial support for artists to survive and create, suggesting that even the most passionate creators need "good taste" patrons.
- There is a clear distinction made between the moral ambiguity of the patrons' wealth (referred to as "blood money") and the positive impact of their patronage.
- The author expresses personal conflict, noting a "heavy hate" for the patrons and their associates, yet recognizes the importance of their role in the artistic ecosystem.
- Gratitude is conveyed, albeit reluctantly, for the patrons who provide artists with the means to pursue their creative endeavors, allowing them to fulfill what the author views as a divine intent to create.
- The piece implies that not all patrons are equally deserving of gratitude; only those with "good taste" that wasn't merely purchased should be thanked.
