Can Capitalism Save Art?

Really interesting article on what can save art and how it got where it's at...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444223104578034480670026450.html?mod=rss_Arts_and_Entertainment

Very interesting. One of the main problems I have with art and artists today is it's inaccessibility to the general public. Sure, anyone can walk into a gallery and look at the work, but why would most people want to? They know they will encounter a gallery assistant who, most likely, won't engage them in discussion unless they are looking to buy, they will be faced with work that they, frankly, don't have the tools to understand, and, when they meet the artist, they are usually confronted with an uninterested wanderer looking more for their next beer than a discussion on their work...especially if the person is unknown and unlearned. I'm not surprised most everyone walks by contemporary work and either wrinkles their nose, looks confused, or has no reaction at all...it doesn't process, we, the artists, don't give the public the tools to process the work, and many artists simply don't care if the general public "gets it."

Art doesn't exist in a vacuum. No matter how much influence we say something has, the rest of the world has to follow along or we are manufacturing culture....creating meaning that simply isn't there. You don't need every single person to be on board 100%, but you can't seclude yourself into a world of artists and think that you are having, or could have, some great effect on humanity...or even the 100 people that live on your street.

Artists really need to get over themselves...me included. Our painting's or found object sculptures aren't going to change the world, especially if we disregard the reaction and opinion of 99% of people. You don't need to necessarily make art that is FOR the general public (work that is simple, easy, or pleasing) but you definitely shouldn't make work with a total disregard for them...