[zarro]

To what degree are artists of the past just famous because of the prejudice of being "well known" instead of the skill that is expressed in their work.

What percent of the money dedicated to old artistic creations gets dedicated to the commission of new work, thereby incentivizing the development of new skills and content from contemporary creative artists.

I feel like a lot of these people just buy expensive (or even go look at) paintings so they can show off to their friends that they have a [or saw a] "Picasso", not because they genuinely love and appreciate the work. Maybe they have don't know how to actually appreciate a work. Would they understand its value without the name attached?