If the activity of the artist seems frivolous in times of economic hardship this is in apart due due to the artwork’s ability to stand aside from the indignities of financial squalor, just as the best art stands aside from the indignity of gross wealth in times of prosperity – only in those times its message is drowned out by the din of the superstar artist, for which barely any remnant of Art truthfully remains, bar its name.
The artist appears as frivolous, unable to commit to or to resolve issues. The artist is an Atheist par-excellence, for whom not one belief, not even a belief in the image or idea which he has committed to the page, the space or the screen, can be held to be true. Constant revision and doubt forms an amoral apology for the ruthless certainty of Politics, Religion and Science.
Art cannot bemoan the current state of the economy: The financial industry wakes periodically to the illusory reality that is, in any case, Art’s premise.
Art as the Atheist par excellence makes a commitment unto nothing, yet this is not the commitment of the Nihilist, who makes no commitment unto anything.
Art’s Atheism must doubt even itself; the opportunity for finding God under an upturned stone is acknowledged, though he is more likely to be found in the rock itself. Or better, the possibility of finding a fair society under a rock is acknowledged by the artist, though it more likely to be found in the rock upon which the artist works, and let that rock be society itself.