As with most art works, it becomes a paradigm or a token for conversation. Imagine in a large rectangular room, hanging on one wall is the original photograph . . . an icon of a picture, perhaps an albumen photograph. On the other side of the room a copy of that one. What would the homeowner say to begin, introducing that piece of art? "That's the original." Where would the gathering be most congregated? If you think it's around the original, you would see the value of seeing the reference for whatever became influenced by that icon of art. If you think it's the copy, you might understand where the paradigm has taken our curiosity. Either way, the value is in the perception. Paying for the paradigm is another question. My assumption is that those few who can afford the original would want to own the reference. Those who cannot afford it, are purely interested in the paradigm. The question that we learn to answer in 1/125th of a second, more or less, has to do with the personal importance of what we shall offer as a paradigm, token for conversation. The value is what we get from that. Steve Shapiro, Carmel, CA
