Probably because that artist and his work were actually influential: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazimir_Malevich
When looked at as an artist, Beeple appears to be the digital art equivalent of some forgettable late-Rococo painter.
Well... yeah?
Has anyone ever argued that the Mona Lisa is worth whatever its raw materials are worth?
The real question is if the Beeple work is interesting as art or is if just a speculative bubble. https://www.ft.com/content/1563d643-332f-3887-8c6e-caf7435f3...
But it does! And that's my point about NFTs.
No art critic or collector makes that argument, and it's an uniformed position to take. People don't pay for the skill - there is no shortage of (very poorly paid) people who can do a convincing forgery of a daVinci.
Something to consider.
