Ashley Allan Blog Post #2 "Picasso or Bitcoin"
"Picasso or Bitcoin"
Canaletto, Venice, the Return of the Bucintoro on Ascension Day, around 1732
The article "Picasso or Bitcoin," written by Scott Reyburn, poses many questions, such as whether owning a Picasso is still the ultimate status symbol. Or has that role shifted to things like Bitcoin and luxury experiences? Art used to be a status symbol for the wealthy, but recent data shows its status might be slipping. Auction houses like Christie's and Sotheby's reported that their sales stayed flat in the first half of 2025, instead of showing growth as was expected. Suggesting the market for art is leveling out rather than growing. This comes because wealthy people are now trying to think more financially and question whether art is worth it, given the costs to buy and sell art, and how hard it is to quickly turn it back into cash. Art starts to look less appealing compared to stocks, gold, or even Bitcoin.
The super rich are now focusing on "modern trophies." Some examples of these would be rare cars, luxury homes, extravagant travel, or cryptocurrencies. However, when truly rare masterpieces come to market, such as a Canaletto painting that sold for nearly $44 million, they will still attract huge attention. Shows that while everyday art may be losing appeal, the very rare works remain powerful symbols of wealth. The article continued on to suggest that in the future, only the most elusive, historically significant works will continue to carry substantial monetary value. As for the rest of the market, art may be shifting back toward being seen less as a quick investment and more as a cultural and personal symbol. People do argue, though, that art has more value because of its connection to human creativity and history in ways that Bitcoin or luxury cars never will. But for now, among the wealthy, the competition between "Picasso or Bitcoin" shows how status is being redefined in a changing world.
As for my personal views on this subject, I can see why wealthy people may want to spend their money on something that is easier to obtain. However, I feel that owning a Picasso is infinitely more of a display of both wealth and culture than purchasing a luxury car. To me, this article raises the question of what is more important to be seen as: wealthy or cultured. Although I do not know many wealthy people, the ones I do know are, for lack of a better word, snobbish. And there is nothing snobs like more than being viewed as more refined and cultured than their peers. For those individuals, it makes sense to invest in art rather than something like Bitcoin. On the flip side, however, newer forms of wealth particularly those tied to the technology industry often lean toward showing off sheer financial success. For that demographic, it is more logical to invest in assets that loudly signal money and novelty, such as cryptocurrency or other flashy luxuries, as a way of proving the success of their industry. And while I do understand that trends shift with each generation of wealth, I personally find the obsession with Bitcoin and other more flashy displays of wealth to be shallow.
With art, I can at least reason that it has cultural and historical weight, but cryptocurrency feels hollow as a status symbol. Spending millions simply to prove you can afford something intangible reflects less about culture and more about ego. In that sense, the article highlights how status itself is being redefined, but in ways that show refinement or intellectual engagement, rather in ways than measuring how loudly one can flaunt financial success. Ultimately, I believe this makes wealth appear performative and even ridiculous, rather than aspirational.
Work Cited
Reyburn, Scott. “Picasso or Bitcoin? How Art’s Status Is Changing among the Super-Rich.” The Art Newspaper - International Art News and Events, The Art Newspaper - International art news and events, 19 Sept. 2025, www.theartnewspaper.com/2025/09/19/picasso-bitcoin-how-status-of-art-status-is-changing-among-super-rich.
This is a very interesting article! I truly have never thought about artwork made by a famous artist this way. It is kind of wild that a Picasso is now competing with Bitcoin as a status symbol. I understand why wealthy people would prefer something that feels more modern and easier to “cash out”, but I would still pick the Picasso. It has more meaning behind it, rather than just having numbers on a screen like in Bitcoin. To me, it would come down to wanting to look cultured over just looking rich. Older wealthy people often want that sense of refinement, while the younger up and rising crowd leans towards flashy things that show wealth. Art shows a story and gives human connection, whereas a luxury car just feels performative.
ReplyDelete