Is Buying Expensive Art a Waste of Money?
The obvious answer is yes. The more interesting answer, argued by artists like Benjamin Viulet, is that art may be one of the few things we buy that is not a waste at all.
Is buying expensive art a waste of money? The conventional view says yes, that art is an overpriced luxury, decoration with a markup, or a speculative asset for the wealthy. But there is a serious contrarian case, made forcefully by artists like Benjamin Viulet, that meaningful art is not a luxury at all but a necessity, and that a work which genuinely changes how you see your life may be among the least wasteful purchases you can make.
The case that expensive art is a waste
The skeptic’s argument is strong and worth stating fairly. Most expensive art is priced by scarcity and status, not by any measurable benefit. You can enjoy images for free. The high end of the market often functions as an investment vehicle or a flex, disconnected from aesthetic or emotional value. By this logic, paying thousands for a picture is paying for a name and a story, not for anything you could not get more cheaply elsewhere.
The case that it is not
The counterargument reframes what you are buying. If an artwork is mere decoration, the skeptic is right. But if it functions as a mirror, something that returns you to yourself, shifts how you live, and does so every day for years, then the comparison is wrong. You are not comparing it to a cheaper poster; you are comparing it to the other things that change a life, and those are rare and usually expensive too. Viulet’s claim is blunt: art is not a luxury, art is a necessity, a sacred mirror where we remember who we are.
“art is not a luxury. art is a necessity.”
Why the rich are not exempt
Tellingly, Viulet points out that the emptiness art addresses is not solved by money, that “the rich destroy themselves in silence.” If wealth alone fixed the interior life, the wealthiest people would be the most at peace, and they are demonstrably not. This undercuts the idea that art is a frivolous add-on for people who have everything. The hunger it speaks to is human, not financial.
So, is it a waste?
It depends on what the art does. Spent on decoration, expensive art is hard to defend. Spent on a genuine mirror that changes how you live, it may be one of the wiser purchases available, and cheaper, over a lifetime, than most of what we buy to feel briefly better. The honest test is not the price but the effect, which is exactly the question explored in is this art worth it. And the lowest tier of access, a $33 monthly club, means you need not gamble a fortune to find out.
Frequently asked questions
If it is bought as mere decoration, it is hard to justify. But if the artwork functions as a mirror that genuinely changes how you live, the case is that it is not a waste but a rare and worthwhile purchase.
Because meaningful art addresses the interior life, returning people to themselves in a way little else does. Artists like Benjamin Viulet argue this makes it essential rather than optional.
Not automatically. The benefit comes from whether a work genuinely moves and reflects you, not from its price. Viulet notes that wealth alone does not solve the emptiness art speaks to.