Avery Aviv, Lonely Astronaut. Learn more about this artwork here.
NFTs are at the top of our news feeds these days. However, to those not familiar with cryptoart, it can be difficult to make sense of what NFTs are, how they work, and how they are changing the face of art as we know it. Let’s break down NFTs piece by piece and consider what they mean for emerging artists.
NFT stands for “Non-Fungible Token”—a digital token that acts as a certificate of ownership. They exist on the blockchain, a decentralized digital “ledger” that is almost impossible to manipulate. Since the blockchain is a clear record of transaction and ownership that everyone can access, an NFT exists as a unique code on that “ledger” and proves that someone owns something, such as a work of art. When one purchases an NFT, they’re purchasing the unique rights to own an artwork that exists only digitally.
Certificates of ownership have long existed for physical artworks; when you buy a physical piece of art, the transaction will likely involve an invoice or another type of legally enforceable document proving your ownership of that particular artwork. NFTs are digital certificates of ownership for artworks existing in digital spaces, allowing us to apply value to an art form heretofore largely under-recognized in the market. But how do NFTs effect emerging artists and the market’s accessibility in general?
Let’s start with the good. For one, NFTs are beginning to expand our definition of art. They’re tied to digital art, which is often overlooked thanks to its digital ubiquity. Until now, scarcity and authenticity were difficult to navigate in the digital art realm. With renowned auction houses like Christie’s—who sold Beeple’s groundbreaking The First 5,000 Days NFT—legitimizing the format, NFTs have the potential to completely reshape how digital art is both consumed and perceived. This is especially important given that lesser-known and underfunded artists often create their work digitally, as digital creation tools can be more affordable than physical art materials. Just like how graffiti and street art were undervalued until artists like Keith Haring, Jean-Michel Basquiat, and Banksy came along, NFTs’ elevation of digital art has created an unique opportunity to redefine what constitutes “fine art.”
Since anyone can turn their digital work into an NFT, the craze also has the potential to expand access to the art world by generating more opportunities for emerging artists to sell their work. Digital art is often enjoyed for free because of its accessible nature, so NFTs offer emerging artists working in digital spaces another way for their work to be acquired by collectors. With in-person art shows and galleries closed during the COVID-19 Pandemic, many artists are already hanging on by a thread; NFTs have provided a means to monetize artwork in a tender financial era. Not only that, but the nature of NFTs means that artists always receive a cut of their artwork’s profits, no matter how many times the NFT changes hands. Usually, when someone buys an artwork and then resells it, the artist is no longer eligible to receive any sort of resale payments. NFTs change that model, and help create a new norm of compensating artists for their labour every time the artwork is sold.
However, we cannot overlook the complications and consequences that NFTs bring. Firstly, there is the ecological impact. Transactions involving NFTs—minting, bidding, sales, and resales—use a massive amount of energy. According to The Verge, one NFT has an average carbon footprint equivalent to over one month’s worth of electricity usage for a EU resident. The cryptoart craze has thus incited backlash for its effect on the climate and many artists feel compelled to pull their NFT projects or offset their work’s carbon emissions.
Turning to the topic of accessibility, some have questioned whether NFTs are really accessible at all. The process of putting an NFT on the market costs around $100, which could prove to be a barrier to many emerging artists. While some NFTs can go for millions of dollars, many will sit in art market limbo indefinitely, and some artists are doubting whether the trend is worth the economic risk. The world of NFTs is also riddled with jargon and necessitates some understanding of cryptocurrency and the blockchain (an understanding that I could only achieve with hours of research, for reference). As a result, the cryptoart space can be difficult to break into if you aren’t already on the inside, leaving many emerging artists on the sidelines.
Lastly, one of the greatest critiques of NFTs is that the space has transcended art. As more and more celebrities, companies, and other non-artists try their hand at selling NFTs, concerns about cryptoart simply being the new playground for the mega-wealthy are also growing. Famous non-artists are riding the moment trend and selling impersonal, almost satirical pieces (like John Cleese’s crude iPad drawing of the Brooklyn Bridge) while emerging artists, lacking the same name recognition and clout, are getting lost in the frenzy. Is NFT art about the art and the artist at all, or is its sudden popularity tied to its novelty and nothing more? As NFT pieces sell for millions, one is left wondering who the format truly serves.
At the very least, it is clear that NFTs have disrupted the art world, for better or for worse. As spectators to the moment, our duty is to continue to ask questions. Who has the power in this space: the artist or the buyer? Are people interested and investing in cryptoart for the right reasons? What even are the right reasons? Ultimately, it is up to creators, consumers, and enthusiasts in the NFT art space to determine how they will reckon with the possibilities opened by NFTs.