Comments on: Is the “The Warhol Economy” good for the production of culture? http://www.weatherpattern.com/2007/10/is-the-the-warhol-economy-good-for-the-production-of-culture/ a blog on design / culture / telecom / networks / work / life / online-offline / new york Fri, 10 Sep 2010 14:55:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Ray http://www.weatherpattern.com/2007/10/is-the-the-warhol-economy-good-for-the-production-of-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-46 Ray Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:16:00 +0000 http://www.weatherpattern.com/2007/10/is-the-the-warhol-economy-good-for-the-production-of-culture/#comment-46 I agree without looking at the winners and losers the system cannot be adequately judged in any context. Is the status quo efficient in an economic sense, or fair in an ethical sense? Here's a counter example, that didn't make it into the post, because I wanted to get it live. If we interview professional athletes, we'll hear stories about support networks, of families, friends, coaches, team mates and schools. It sounds like a successful network that pumps millions of dollars directly and indirectly into the local economies of the cities who host NFL, MBL, NBA, and NHL teams. Does that mean we should encourage polices to support to these teams and young people to pursue careers in athletics? Obviously the chances of becoming a pro-athlete is much less then the professional creative. However, in both cases, by only looking at the successful cases, we cannot discern parity of the process. I agree without looking at the winners and losers the system cannot be adequately judged in any context. Is the status quo efficient in an economic sense, or fair in an ethical sense?

Here’s a counter example, that didn’t make it into the post, because I wanted to get it live. If we interview professional athletes, we’ll hear stories about support networks, of families, friends, coaches, team mates and schools. It sounds like a successful network that pumps millions of dollars directly and indirectly into the local economies of the cities who host NFL, MBL, NBA, and NHL teams. Does that mean we should encourage polices to support to these teams and young people to pursue careers in athletics?

Obviously the chances of becoming a pro-athlete is much less then the professional creative. However, in both cases, by only looking at the successful cases, we cannot discern parity of the process.

]]> By: Frank http://www.weatherpattern.com/2007/10/is-the-the-warhol-economy-good-for-the-production-of-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-45 Frank Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:12:45 +0000 http://www.weatherpattern.com/2007/10/is-the-the-warhol-economy-good-for-the-production-of-culture/#comment-45 Great review, sounds like this is a very interesting topic the book is describing. I particularly like your focus on the losers, who are constantly venting in places like gawker: http://nymag.com/news/features/39319/ My biggest concern about the Warhol economy is that it plays into what Robert Frank called the Winner Take All Society. Are really visible prizes at the top luring too many people to try to be part of a creative class? Finally, what about inequality of income...are we basically creating a courtier society where it matters more to prepare baubles for the wealthy than to make products that actually improve most people's lives? Certainly the recent show "Design for the OTher 90%" suggested as much...though i'm not saying that, say, the pharma or legal industries do much better distributionally. Great review, sounds like this is a very interesting topic the book is describing. I particularly like your focus on the losers, who are constantly venting in places like gawker:

http://nymag.com/news/features/39319/

My biggest concern about the Warhol economy is that it plays into what Robert Frank called the Winner Take All Society. Are really visible prizes at the top luring too many people to try to be part of a creative class? Finally, what about inequality of income…are we basically creating a courtier society where it matters more to prepare baubles for the wealthy than to make products that actually improve most people’s lives? Certainly the recent show “Design for the OTher 90%” suggested as much…though i’m not saying that, say, the pharma or legal industries do much better distributionally.

]]>