ABSTRACT
There is something both contradictory and righteous about the commingling of realms of value. The pecuniary and the profound, the fungible and the beautiful, and the populist and the professional seem at once independent and contingent. All may be “seared with trade,” but Hopkins (1953) reminds us that still “[t]here lives the dearest freshness deep down things.” One of our tasks as researchers is to understand this interpenetration of art and asset, and the animism that binds them.
