I generally feel like art shouldn't be evaluated based on how well known the person making it is.
I'm thinking about how that should apply in music, but it is obvious that people will go for the album of the more well known singer, even if it is technically inferior to the one of an anonymous young dude who hasn't had success yet.
I understand where you're coming from, but I think most artists would have objections to trying to decide any "ought" statement about the value of art. I'm sure there are plenty who would say the reputation and history surrounding the artist in fact adds to the meaning of the piece and is an inseparable quality.
I generally feel like art shouldn't be evaluated based on how well known the person making it is.
I'm thinking about how that should apply in music, but it is obvious that people will go for the album of the more well known singer, even if it is technically inferior to the one of an anonymous young dude who hasn't had success yet.
I understand where you're coming from, but I think most artists would have objections to trying to decide any "ought" statement about the value of art. I'm sure there are plenty who would say the reputation and history surrounding the artist in fact adds to the meaning of the piece and is an inseparable quality.