11–17 of 17 posts
some people say that the popularity of the monalisa is due more to the fact that has been stolen many times as opposed to its actual artistic value. it's more about the story behind the piece than the piece itself
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure there's an academic word for it, but after some point, popularity can simply breed more popularity, without any actionable, functional reason. Get popular enough, and people will find it worthwhile to publish reasons for why something is as popular as it is, just to therapeutically reassure themselves that the adoration isn't meaningless.
> I'm sure there's an academic word for it kardashianism?
some people say that the popularity of the monalisa is due more to the fact that has been stolen many times as opposed to its actual artistic value. it's more about the story behind the piece than the piece itself
I'm sure there's an academic word for it, but after some point, popularity can simply breed more popularity, without any actionable, functional reason. Get popular enough, and people will find it worthwhile to publish reasons for why something is as popular as it is, just to therapeutically reassure themselves that the adoration isn't meaningless.
some people say that the popularity of the monalisa is due more to the fact that has been stolen many times as opposed to its actual artistic value. it's more about the story behind the piece than the piece itself
I'm sure there's an academic word for it, but after some point, popularity can simply breed more popularity, without any actionable, functional reason. Get popular enough, and people will find it worthwhile to publish reasons for why something is as popular as it is, just to therapeutically reassure themselves that the adoration isn't meaningless.
The Matthew effect of accumulated advantage, Matthew principle, or Matthew effect for short, is sometimes summarized by the adage "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer". The concept is applicable to matters of fame or status, but may also be applied literally to cumulative advantage of economic capital. In the beginning, Matthew effects were primarily focused on the inequality in the way scientists were recognized for their work. However, Norman W. Storer, of Columbia University, led a new wave of research. He believed he discovered that the inequality that existed in the social sciences also existed in other institutions.
This reminds me of the recent movie about the man who stole the Duke of Wellington portrait from the National Gallery in London in the 1960s. Both were caught due to their own actions and not those of investigators. It was amusing because he (Duke of Wellington thief) was only convicted of stealing the frame, as the jury decided that he had only borrowed the painting itself.