Artistic Integrity and Contemporary Business Models.

Creative industries have given art professionals a ticket to look openly into commerce. This contrasts with the traditional approach where artists are rewarded in gift-like forms. The tradition of public funding and non-market rewards results in artists performing or exhibiting their work for free. This stems from patronage which from the 19th century has included the State with public museums for educating society more broadly.

In the 21st century public financing for art and culture is decreasing and having a significant affect on art professionals. Now artists are expected to earn their living. So what are the business models of today's artists and what role does public financing play?

Art does not have utility, it is an artist's self expression; while design provides a utilitarian good because it is for a customer. Design constrains the artistic process. Art does not have justifiable commercial value while design is fully commercial.

Sociology abstracts from economic transactions while economic theories often abstain from difficult to measure emotional aspects. However, both are looking at the same life procesess - simultaneously people create art, live in families, communities and society and earn their living.

On one hand the tradition of cultural education ignores commerce since it is believed to compromise artistic integrity, while every professional artist needs to have their personal business model to survive. Much of society does not appreciate that the artistic process requires intensive personal input, creating broad gains in the form of a public good, but which is not fully rewarded by the commercial market. Artistic input is not a “service” whose commercialization is simple. Present thinking concludes that the solution for culture professionals is not one but a set of elements combining a more rational approach by artists to generating revenue and a more supportive attitude from their audience.