Art, Avarice, and Ambition: Unraveling the Leroy Brothers' “Art for Money – Money for Art”

As the smoke and dust settled post the 2008 financial crisis, an atmosphere of uncertainty and skepticism towards traditional financial paradigms took root. Into this atmosphere of suspicion, the Leroy Brothers unveiled their incisive installation, “Art for Money – Money for Art” in 2012. Interweaving classic narrative tropes with contemporary allegory, this piece stands as a telling critique of both human nature in relation to wealth and the entwined fates of art and commerce.


Drawing inspiration from the fables of Jean de la Fontaine, a 17th-century French fabulist, the Leroy Brothers crafted a parable for the modern age. La Fontaine's works were known for their moralist undertones, subtly questioning societal norms of his time. Similarly, the Leroy Brothers have channeled the essence of these fables but have adapted them to offer poignant commentary on the global economic milieu of their era.


The three characters in the installation are not just standalone representations; they are archetypes of human response to the call of Mammon. The Golddigger, portrayed by the blind mole, is a symbol of ambition, albeit unseeing, driven by the lure of uncharted territories. This character echoes the age-old human tendency to venture into the unknown, seeking fortune, reminiscent of the Gold Rush pioneers or modern-day entrepreneurs venturing into emerging markets.


The Saver, on the other hand, represents prudence. The squirrel, known in folklore for its foresight in storing provisions for tougher times, here clings to its precious stash of gold coins. It’s a character that resonates deeply in the post-crisis world, underlining the innate human desire for security amidst economic uncertainty.

But perhaps the most striking character is the Lavish Spender. In the shattered visage of the piggy bank, the Leroy Brothers masterfully capture the pitfalls of materialism and unchecked consumerism. This character serves as a stark warning, an embodiment of modern society's perilous dance with debt.


The most profound layer of this installation, however, lies in its introspection of the art market itself. Historically, art and money have shared a complex relationship. Great art has often found patronage in wealth, yet the very act of commodifying art challenges its intrinsic, intangible value. “Art for Money – Money for Art” doesn't shy away from confronting this duality. It raises fundamental questions: Can art thrive without the lubricant of money? And inversely, does the world of finance and commerce find its soul, its humanity, in the world of art?


In drawing parallels between these seemingly disparate worlds, the Leroy Brothers' installation offers a panoramic view of society's ever-evolving relationship with wealth. The undercurrent of the piece is undeniably clear: our collective values, desires, and fears are often mirrored not just in the financial decisions we make but also in the art we produce and consume.


In sum, “Art for Money – Money for Art” is not just a critique but a mirror. A mirror held up by the Leroy Brothers to reflect society's intricate dance with money and art. And as with all great art, it doesn't just offer answers but compels the viewer to introspect, question, and perhaps redefine their own relationship with art and avarice.

Back To Top