Alma Gluck Quotes

Painting was a problem - you produce a thing, and then you sell it and get money, and that was quickly considered totally uncool.

The entire world of art has reached such a low level, it has been commercialized to such a degree that art and everything related to it has become one of the most trivial activities of our epoch.

Today, they're just up there for the money, just packaged and be gone.

Not to say people shouldn't get rich from art. I adore the alchemy wherein artists who cast a complex spell make rich people give them their money. (Just writing it makes me cackle.) But too many artists have been making money without magic.

The artist is seen like a producer of commodities, like a factory that turns our refrigerators.

Capitalists work hard to produce what consumers want. Artists who work too hard to produce what consumers want are often accused of selling out. Thus, even the languages of capitalism and art conflict: a firm that has 'sold out' has succeeded, but an artist that has 'sold out' has failed.

As soon as any art is pursued with a view of money, then farewell, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, all hope of genuine good work.

I think everything is a motive for money. Every thought, every belief, everything we're taught in school.

In my world, if you want to make a record to make money, you're already off to a bad start.

For me, money has never been an indicator. And it is very sad that each and every film these days is being judged by the money that it makes. It's a world that I don't want to be a part of, and I try and stay away from that.

Even genius is tied to profit.

The public buys "art" - but the word is drained of its meaning.

Count art by gold, and it fetters the feet it once winged.

I think hard-core capitalism tends to commercialize everything.

It's not ideal when art is seen as just some passing entertainment quickly thrown out into the market, like a consumer object. You have to let things settle and think about them.

People gotta realize as a fighter you want to become a champion because you get paid way more money. So the belt is very intriguing for that reason.

There's a fine line between artist and product. I don't think the industry purposely does it, but I think that's just the way they maneuver. You have to be careful that doesn't become your story, where you become a product, and your art is tarnished because you're just seen as a tool to make money.

I'm not interested in artistic records for the sake of making artistic records where they're so cool no one listens to them.

Art does, to some extent, follow economics.

Whether it's a huge hit or sold five copies, as long artistically and creatively I can stand by what I did, then I'll feel successful.

No matter how lofty a film is, it becomes a product after entering the market. It has a price. I think no matter what your purpose of shooting it, it has to have artistic value and then sell. But you can't make money if it doesn't have artistic value.

I personally don't distinguish between artistic and commercial films.

There's this concept in urban music and lifestyle that money is everything, and I'm just not with it. If it makes money, it doesn't make it good. If it's good, it's good.

I always remember my dad saying, "No one makes a remake unless they are trying to make money; there is no reason for it." It was not an honorable thing to do.