> He drew some surprising conclusions: the writers were less likely to carry on, whereas some of the greatest artists, Michelangelo, Titian, Rembrandt van Rijn, J. M. W. Turner, Paul Cézanne, Claude Monet, Henri Matisse, and in our day, Pablo Picasso and Jasper Johns, became, if anything, more productive and liberated from convention as they went into old age, despite the physical effort involved. Clark did not really give the whys of the old—in both senses—masters’ endurance as against the poets’ falling off.
Wonder if that has something to do with the economics of plastic works. While an artist is alive, he can keep pumping out works, what limits valuation while in life. When he/she dies, scarcity ensues, as no work of art by that particular artist will be ever produced again, what allows works from famous artists to be worth millions. So, as recognized artists enter into old age, the prospects of impending "scarcity" keep buyers even more interested, even if technical acumen degrades to some degree.
Wonder if that has something to do with the economics of plastic works. While an artist is alive, he can keep pumping out works, what limits valuation while in life. When he/she dies, scarcity ensues, as no work of art by that particular artist will be ever produced again, what allows works from famous artists to be worth millions. So, as recognized artists enter into old age, the prospects of impending "scarcity" keep buyers even more interested, even if technical acumen degrades to some degree.