BE MORE CONCEPTUAL REGARDING NON-
FUNGIBLE TOKENS (NFTS) AS ART
Kensuke Ito, Endowed Chair for Blockchain Innovation, 这
University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ward, 东京, 7-3-1,
日本. 电子邮件: k-ito@g.ecc.u-tokyo.ac.jp
参见https://direct.mit.edu/leon/issue/56/3 for supplemental files associated
与这个问题.
Submitted: 17 八月 2022
抽象的
t
C
A
r
t
s
乙
A
This statement presents the author’s proposition—“Let’s be more con-
ceptual!”—in response to the attempt to interpret Non-Fungible To-
kens (NFTs) as contemporary art. In the context of NFTs, this opinion
has the significance of finding artistry in the underlying decentralized
autonomous consensus-building, and in the context of contemporary
艺术, it has the significance of leading to the revival of early conceptual
艺术. The second half of this statement covers the novelty and feasibility
of this opinion, referring to precedents in art and engineering.
Focusing on the Novelty of Consensus Building
Due in part to recent market growth (如图. 1), Non-Fungible To-
kens (NFTs), “transferable and unique digital assets on public
blockchains” [1], attract many attempts to interpret them as
contemporary art. Like everything else, we can place NFTs in
a variety of art contexts by focusing on their different aspects.
例如, if we focus on the new medium of public block-
链, NFTs can be media (or digital, 互联网) 艺术. If we focus
on the automatic image generation in several projects (例如.
CryptoKitties [2] and ArtBlocks [3]), NFTs can be generative
艺术. Even the opinion that NFT is an emerging culture unre-
lated to fine art will eventually be in the pop art context.
Considering these different aspects, I believe that we should
focus more on the underlying consensus-building process, i.e.
the incentive mechanism of public blockchains that allows
anonymous nodes to determine true on-chain transaction rec-
ords in a decentralized, autonomous manner. This focus ap-
plies best because consensus-building is the novelty that
distinguishes NFTs from existing digital data. 具体来说,
given that duplicable and programmable digital data has relied
on a centralized authority (例如. a market administrator) to en-
sure its provenance, consensus building—a method for break-
ing free from dependence—is the essential novelty through
which we should find artistry.
Connecting with the Context of Conceptual Art
下一个, seeking an art context to connect with this novelty, 我
选择 (early) conceptual art, which has challenged institu-
tional authority more explicitly than other movements.
Early conceptual art has fostered various attempts to ques-
tion the role of authority in the distribution and evaluation of
artworks, such as conducting a duplicable exhibition on paper
(The Xerox Book) [4], or classifying gallery visitors by age,
性别, religion, 种族, social class, and occupation (Gal-
lery-Visitor’s Profile) [5]. 然而, this trend did not lead to
design of an alternative form of institution without authorities.
For that reason, in the 1970s, many discourses on the failure of
conceptual art were developed by those involved in conceptual
art themselves; they generally pointed out that conceptual art
had the potential to transform institutions but was now stuck in
institutional critique within existing institutions [6]. 鉴于这种
语境, the consensus-building behind NFTs can be inter-
preted as a strong counter to the discourse of the failure of con-
ceptual art (or as a revival of early conceptual art) in that it has
finally designed an institution with no centralized authorities,
albeit in the limited scope of distribution (i.e. transfer records).
如图. 1. Monthly Volume of NFTs in OpenSea, the world’s larg-
est NFT marketplace. (© Kensuke Ito) (来源: @rchen8 /
OpenSea monthly volume, dune.xyz/queries/3469/6913, 交流电-
cessed 30 七月 2022).
Based on the above, we may find artistry in the Bitcoin pro-
tocol [7], the first to design such consensus building, 和它的
成分 (例如. mining machine, full node). 此外, 我们
could state that one of the possibilities of NFTs as art is institu-
tional design that extends the scope of consensus building to
the evaluation of NFTs and other artworks; 这里, the institu-
的 (协议) itself becomes contemporary conceptual art.
This institutional design leads to an alternative evaluation axis
that is different from (but compatible with) existing ones such
as market prices and reviews by art historians. The norm there
might be the amount of staked tokens or citation relationships
of NFTs, as discussed below.
Of the many approaches to interpreting NFTs as contempo-
rary art, the author believes that this one—combining consen-
sus building and conceptual art, thereby finding artistry in
institutional design—is the most essential.
Precedents in Art
To the best of my knowledge, this statement is an intersection
of two (interrelated) approaches in artistic precedents to NFTs
and blockchains.
One approach is to create artworks while incorporating the
essence of consensus building. 例如, Plantoid [8], a se-
ries of self-replicating sculptures, incorporates blockchain-
based consensus-building (and evolutionary algorithms) 到德-
termine the visual and functional features of its progeny; 这
Currency [9], an NFT project with 10,000 件, requires buy-
ers to make a choice between an NFT and a corresponding
physical artwork within a year. These precedents generally use
consensus-building (or something like it) as one component of
media art or neo-conceptual art. 相比之下, this statement
aims to make consensus building the core of artworks and em-
phasize its connection to conceptual art (hence the output be-
comes the institution itself, which is less visual and emotional
but more decentralized and autonomous).
Another approach would be to critique NFTs, blockchains,
and related artworks in the context of conceptual art. 对于前-
充足, as of 2014 (when the term NFT was not common),
Rhea Myers analogized bitcoin and blockchain-based artworks
to conceptual art, as implying a new art-money relationship
[10]; Hito Steyerl, 另一方面, pointed out that the value
of bitcoin, like art, comes from collusion and group power ra-
ther than decentralization [11]; Tina Rivers Ryan warned of
the disconnect between NFTs and the history of conceptual,
digital, and even blockchain-based arts that has explored alter-
native distribution models to the market [12]. These precedents
are generally institutional critiques with traditional topics such
as the commons and ownership, digital and physical, and pub-
licness and capitalism. 相比之下, this statement aims to
290 莱昂纳多, 卷. 56, 不. 3, PP. 290–291, 2023
https://doi.org/10.1162/leon_a_02366 ©2023 ISAST
根据知识共享署名发布 4.0 国际的 (抄送 4.0) 执照.
从http下载的://direct.mit.edu/leon/article-pdf/56/3/290/2108958/leon_a_02366.pdf by guest on 08 九月 2023
时间
n
e
中号
e
时间
A
时间
s
address institutional design by focusing on the novelty of con-
sensus-building in order to revive early conceptual art (in other
字, to avoid reproducing the failure of conceptual art) [13].
Precedents in Engineering
This statement is by no means unrealistic, according to several
precedents in engineering.
第一的, consensus-building has already extended its scope to
information outside the blockchain (例如. election results, cus-
tomer review). This extension, in applications such as predic-
tion markets [14] and token-curated registries [15], leverages
the wisdom of crowds in a decentralized autonomous manner.
Consensus-building in these applications, with some varia-
系统蒸发散, basically uses the following token-staking scheme: (我)
users can stake any amount of tokens on either accepting or re-
jecting certain information; (二) the side that collects more to-
kens becomes the consensus; (三、) all staked tokens are
redistributed among users who chose the consensus side [16].
This scheme assumes 1 token = 1 投票.
It would be natural for the above to cover the evaluation of
NFTs. 例如, MUSE0 [17], a decentralized NFT collec-
的, lets token holders vote on which NFTs to include in the
收藏 (tokens are issued to the address that provided the
NFTs for the collection); SuperRare [18], an NFT marketplace
where all artists are curated by the administrator, is considering
an update that allows token holders to participate in the cura-
tion process or create their own marketplaces with individual
curation policies. In both examples, consensus-building adopts
a norm of 1 token = 1 投票.
此外, we should not overlook attempts to introduce
other norms. 例如, the recent trend of token graphs
[19]—network structures that visualize NFT transfer/owner-
ship records—could be applied to consensus building, 例如
giving more weight to the opinions of those who trade/own
many NFTs. In terms of network structure, I also see potential
in the citation relationship of NFTs themselves. If NFTs had
citations like academic papers [20], consensus-building might
reflect the expertise of (anonymous) nodes by giving weight to
the opinions of those who create largely cited NFTs (just like
academic peer-review).
These precedents suggest the solid feasibility of this state-
蒙特, an institutional design that extends the scope of consen-
sus-building to the evaluation of NFTs and other artworks. 为了
例子, I have consensus-building for the evaluation of intel-
lectual products, which leverages citation relationships (作为一个
norm) and game-theoretic reward computation [21–23]. Such a
proposal can and should be interpreted in the context of art as
well as engineering.
结论
This statement presented the proposition “Let’s be more con-
ceptual!” in response to the attempt to interpret NFTs as con-
temporary art. Conceptual here means “an attitude to address
institutional design, rather than critique or dependence.” That
是, “Let’s understand the underlying consensus-building and
extend it, not just criticize or use existing NFTs. This is obvi-
ously not easy (even though feasible) and will require time,
钱, 知识, and patience to put into practice. 然而,
I believe that art should respond to NFTs with such an ambi-
tious attitude. Because it would surely update the context of
conceptual art, and above all, not challenging it would seem to
be dismissive of NFTs and their roots, the thoughts of Bitcoin
developers.
Acknowledgment
The author expresses his gratitude to Mohammed bin Salman Center for Future
Science and Technology for Saudi-Japan Vision 2030 (MbSC2030) for provid-
ing financial support.
参考文献和注释
1. Lennart Ante, “Non-fungible token (NFT) markets on the Ethereum block-
链: Temporal development, cointegration and interrelations”: Social Sci-
ences Research Network (SSRN) 3904683 (2021).
2. CryptoKitties: cryptokitties.co/ (访问过 30 七月 2022).
3. ArtBlocks: artblocks.io/ (访问过 30 七月 2022).
4. Untitled (Xerox Book): moma.org/collection/works/illustrat-
edbooks/11400?locale=es (访问过 14 八月 2022).
5. artforum.com/print/197306/hans-haacke-s-gallery-visitors-profile-36288 (交流电-
cessed 14 八月 2022).
6. Blake Stimson, “The Promise of Conceptual Art,” in Conceptual Art: A Criti-
cal Anthology, A. Alberro and B. Stimson, 编辑. (剑桥, 嘛: 与新闻界,
1999).
7. Satoshi Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system,” Decen-
tralized Business Review (2008) p. 21260.
8. Plantoids: Blockchain-based life forms: plantoid.org/ (访问过 14 八月
2022).
9. The Currency – HENI: currency.nft.heni.com/ (访问过 14 八月 2022).
10. Rhea Myers, “(Conceptual) Art, Cryptocurrency and Beyond,” Furtherfield
(15 十月 2014): furtherfield.org/conceptual-art-cryptocurrency-and-beyond/
(访问过 14 八月 2022).
11. Hito Steyerl, “Is Art a Currency?,” Verso books (2 四月 2019): 版本-
sobooks.com/blogs/3938-is-art-a-currency-hito-steyerl (访问过 14 八月
2022).
12. Tina Rivers Ryan, “Token Gesture,” Artforum (可能 2021): 艺术-
forum.com/print/202105/token-gesture-85475 (访问过 14 八月 2022).
13. Note that this intent does not deny the concepts of commons or public goods
but emphasizes the importance of institutional design for consensus-building,
which is a necessary condition for their realization.
14. Justin Wolfers and Eric Zitzewitz, “Prediction markets,” Journal of Eco-
nomic Perspectives 18, 不. 2, 107–126 (2004).
15. Jaspreet Kaur and B. Visveswaraiah, “A Brief Survey of Token Curated
Registries,” in Emerging Technologies in Data Mining and Information Secu-
理性 (新加坡: 施普林格, 2011) PP. 189–202.
16. Note that this token-staking scheme also presents its own problems, 例如
the Keynesian beauty contest (see Herve Moulin, Game theory for the social
科学 [NYU Press, 1986]).
17. MUSE0: muse0.xyz/ (访问过 30 七月 2022).
18. SuperRare Docs Hub: docs.superrare.com/ (访问过 14 八月 2022).
19. Simone Casale-Brunet et al., “Networks of Ethereum Non-Fungible Tokens:
A graph-based analysis of the ERC-721 ecosystem,” 2021 IEEE International
Conference on Blockchain (Blockchain) (十二月 2021) PP. 188–195.
20. NFTs (or other artworks) with citations can be made possible by treating
the attribution in CC BY-SA as a citation. CC BY-SA is one of the licenses of-
fered by Creative Commons that allows anyone to modify and distribute intel-
lectual products, on condition that they attach both an appropriate credit
(归因) and the same CC BY-SA license (ShareAlike).
21. Kensuke Ito, “[Can we design a protocol to accumulate context on a P2P
网络?] P2P network jyou ni bunmyaku wo ruiseki saseru protocolha settukei
kanou ka? (in Japanese),” Bijutsu Techo, 70.1073 (2018) PP. 90–93.
22. Kensuke Ito and Hideyuki Tanaka, “Token-Curated Registry with Citation
图形,” Ledger No. 4 (2019).
23. Kensuke Ito, “Consensus-Building on Citations in Peer-to-Peer Systems”:
Social Sciences Research Network (SSRN) 3936833 (2021).
从http下载的://direct.mit.edu/leon/article-pdf/56/3/290/2108958/leon_a_02366.pdf by guest on 08 九月 2023
Ito, Be More Conceptual Regarding Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) as Art 291