Dear Coleagues. I'm in the process of writing a conceptual paper about how luxury brand-artist cooperations change aesthetic routines of stakeholders and what is the output of such changes. Here is one on the topics: limited explanation of the cooperation content promotes ignorancy.

The art-event makers: "the emblemating Kusama's polka dots". Consumers: "Awful", "designer went to kindergarten art class that day ..he came back happily with this bag". This is how the explanations of the art-project makers reduced to the signs provoke ignorant consumer valuations and turn Yayoi Kusama's art into decoration. And then scholars analyze the consumers' valuations as data in their studies. When you know "Narcissus Garden" you understand the diffenece between the sign (the dots) and the problem (anti-Narcisism) in Kusama's art. https://www.facebook.com/LouisVuitton/photos/a.341470190124/10167192333530125 Do you think that Social Practice Theory (E. Shove) is right to use in the conceptual paper about this? Any other methodological ideas? #luxury #brand #artist #art

Similar questions and discussions