The Language of the Gods and Digital Art: When Numbers Silence the Essence
August 05, 2025
Economics, as Professor Ha-Joon Chang has pointed out, has become a language of power, just as Latin was once the sacred language of the medieval Church. Those who do not master it are excluded from debate, forced to accept incomprehensible arguments as unquestionable truths. This parallel reveals a broader phenomenon: the creation of hermetic languages that serve less for communication and more for the maintenance of hierarchies.
In digital art, a new "Language of the Gods" has emerged, but its vocabulary is not theological, it is financial. Terms like "minimum price," "market capitalization," and "trading volume" dominate discussions that, in theory, should revolve around creativity, concept, and cultural impact. The language of the market, obscure to many, has become the primary measure of value, relegating art itself to a secondary role.
It is nothing new that art and money coexist. From Renaissance patrons to contemporary galleries, the relationship between creation and commerce has always been complex. However, there is a crucial difference between recognizing this dynamic and reducing art to a mere financial asset. When collectors call their acquisitions a "portfolio" and platforms highlight an artist's "liquidity," the message is clear: what matters is not the work itself, but its market performance.
This logic is perverse. Artists are pressured to justify their work not by its originality or relevance, but by numbers on a spreadsheet. Essential questions"What does this work mean?"; "How does it interact with the world?" are replaced by "What was the last sale price?" The result is a distortion: art that doesn't fit into financial metrics is treated as irrelevant, while superficial works can be inflated to masterpiece status simply by market movements.
It is naive, however, to blame only collectors or platforms. The system as a whole fuels this dynamic. Artists, often out of necessity, internalize this language, learning to present their work in terms of "potential return" rather than artistic expression. Economic survival becomes inseparable from the creative process, and the autonomy of art dissolves into transactions.
But there is resistance. Many creators and art lovers refuse to accept that cultural value can be quantified. They remember that true art transcends market trends, whether a piece sells for a few dollars or millions. The impact of a work lies in its ability to provoke, question, and move, not in its price in a database.
The crucial question, then, is: how to rescue digital art from this tyranny of numbers? The answer begins with a shift in narrative. Collectors can prioritize stories over figures. Curators can highlight concepts instead of price charts. Artists can refuse to reduce their practices to liquidity strategies. The market will not disappear, but it can be put in its rightful place, as a tool, not a judge.
The Language of the Gods, whether in economics or art, serves those in power. But true art has never been about obedience. It's about disruption. And for that, no financial jargon is necessary.
From the Asscracks of the Gods once we crawled, from the Tears of the Demons we are devoured. We are GODS and MONSTERS Titel: The Five Eldest Children of Charles I Creator: Anthony van Dyck Sub Creator: Polygonist Machine : Stable/Lora/Lustermix