In response to Brycen...

This week, Brycen brought up the topic of "marginal utility"--as Piper puts it, "the utility or desirabliity of the last in the series of commodities consumed." As Brycen explains it, "One gets the most satisfaction or pleasure from the first time experiencing something. The same goes with art. The first time you experience something you gain the most pleasure from it."  He then raises the question, "could one gain more satisfaction from a non original or copy of a work of art?"

First off, I disagree with this idea of marginal utility in some senses.  It is true that oftentimes the more one sees/experiences something, the less they'll be overwhelmed or impressed with it, but I think (at least with a lull of time in between) one can be just as satisfied the first time seeing something as the 20th time they see it.  This is especially the case with performance art.  Why else would people return to see the same bands or return to see the same ballet or musical more than once?  These types of art are oftentimes unoriginal copies of the initial performance, yet people continue to come back to see repeat performances, and are similarly or even perhaps more satisfied the more they see them.  I also believe that over time as one becomes more educated on the performance--ie. studies ballet themself, learns the lyrics of a bands songs, etc.--the more they'll come to be satisfied with the show the next time they attend a performance.  

So, to answer Brycen's question, yes, I do believe one can actually gain more satisfaction from a copy of art, yet this applies more to performance art than to visual art.