Well, VanGough couldn't sell a thing and although his work was not thought of as "art" at the time, who would say that today. An today his work goes for millions. So in my opinion, money has nothing to do with art.

I understand your point of view but look at what you said in your post, his work wasn't considered art until it became worth money meaning the money determined when it became art. By that example it would appear that until someone is willing to pay for an artist's work, its not considered art.

Sorry, I didn't mean that his art wasn't appreciated until it was worth millions. When the impressionism movement became recognized he was venerated then.

I think within every artist exists the compelling need to create.

It is this, I feel, that determines who is "artist" and who is not.

The artifacts created are mere footprints of the creative process at work.

Where the danger is, for me personally, is when I allow my own creative value be determined by the marketability of a piece. I would love to "make my living" by making art...but at the same time, I am fearful of the influence that wondering about the sales potential of a piece may have on my own creative process.

If money was the motivator or a requirement of being an Artist, I probably Quit.

I started to paint to get away from my job, money all that baggage that comes with money, It is a positive channel verse other unconstructive ways people escape. I have sold a few painting only cause someone asked me to do something. but for me it is an escape, it that makes something else than a artist that ok, and if what I do isn't art, move over VanGough

This is a good question. I don't think money makes it art necessarily, but it certainly means that a particular artist has hit a universal nerve that can evoke a wide range of emotions. Once they have created that buzz in the art world, the investers step in and that's when art becomes over valued. Of course I would not mind have my work over valued! LOL

My opinion is that money does not necessarily dictate what is art but in its own way it validates specific artwork. Like Dave said it indicates an artist has "hit a universal nerve".

I am curious. For those of you who only create art for yourselves, do you only make enough to hang on your wall or give to friends? If you are a prolific artist for self, do you have a large warehouse where you keep your pieces and go look at them from time to time? I can't fathom creating a piece of artwork (especially if I am really proud of it) and not sharing it with whoever wants to take a look. That would go back to monetary value because for it to be seen in any other place besides your living room arrangements have to be made. Arrangements that cost money. Especially if its to be taken serious and not just "oh thats cute, you made a pretty drawing."