NFTs and the Reconfiguration of Value Attribution in Digital Art
Abstract
This article argues that non-fungible tokens (NFTs) should be understood less as a novel artistic medium than as an ownership infrastructure responding to a long-standing incompatibility between digital art’s allographic reproducibility and the contemporary art world’s autographic value regime. It proposes that NFTs displaced artistic value formation from the relatively insulated and semi-autonomous institutional structures of the art world into open financial markets. Historically, the art world maintained its cultural and financial autonomy through systems of mediation grounded in scarcity, authenticity, and controlled ownership, which buffered artworks from direct exposure to speculative volatility. By enabling provable ownership of infinitely reproducible digital files without requiring institutional validation, NFTs relocated value attribution to decentralized marketplaces governed primarily by supply, demand, and investor expectations. Situated within the broader trajectory of emerging technologies, NFTs’ rapid rise and collapse follow the pattern of a hype cycle. This trajectory closely corresponds to the macroeconomic conditions of the post-pandemic period. The article argues that the extreme fluctuations in NFT value and public interest were not anomalous, but the predictable consequence of transferring artistic ownership out of the relatively sheltered institutional system of the art world and into open, speculative financial environments. Rather than representing a failed artistic experiment, NFTs emerge as a structural development whose long-term significance lies in redefining ownership and value attribution within the art world and digital culture.
Keywords Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs), Digital Art, Artistic Autonomy, Autographic and Allographic Artworks, Art Market, Hype Cycle
Öz
NFT’ler ve Dijital Sanatta Değer Üretiminin Yeniden Yapılandırılması
Bu makale, non-fungible token’ların (NFT), yeni bir sanatsal üretim mecrasından ziyade, dijital sanatın alografik yeniden üretilebilir doğası ile çağdaş sanat dünyasının otografik değer rejimi arasındaki uyumsuzluğa yanıt veren bir mülkiyet altyapısı olarak anlaşılması gerektiğini ileri sürmektedir. Makale, NFT’lerin sanatsal değer oluşumunu, sanat dünyasının görece yalıtılmış ve yarı-özerk kurumsal yapılarından çıkararak açık finansal piyasalara taşıdığını savunur. Tarihsel olarak sanat dünyası, biriciklik, özgünlük, denetimli mülkiyet ve kurumsal aracılık mekanizmaları üzerinden kendi kültürel ve finansal özerkliğini kurmuş; bu sayede sanat eserlerini spekülatif piyasa dalgalanmalarına doğrudan maruz kalmaktan büyük ölçüde koruyabilmiştir. Buna karşılık NFT’ler, sonsuz biçimde yeniden üretilebilen dijital dosyalar üzerinde, kurumsal sanat dünyasının aracılığına ihtiyaç duymaksızın doğrulanabilir mülkiyet imkânı sağlayarak, değer atfetme süreçlerini arz-talep dengesi ve yatırımcı beklentileri tarafından şekillenen merkeziyetsiz piyasalara taşımıştır. Gelişen teknolojilerin tipik yayılım döngüsü içerisinde değerlendirildiğinde, NFT’lerin hızlı yükselişi ve çöküşü, beklentilerin aşırı şişmesi ve ardından gelen hayal kırıklığı ile karakterize edilen bir ‘hype cycle’ modelini izlemektedir. Bu süreç aynı zamanda COVID-19 pandemisi sonrasında ortaya çıkan olağanüstü makroekonomik koşullarla da örtüşmektedir. Bu bağlamda makale, NFT’lerin finansal değeri ve üzerlerine yönelen ilginin aşırı dalgalı yapısının bir istisna değil, sanatsal mülkiyetin sanat dünyasının görece korunaklı kurumsal sisteminden çıkarılarak açık ve yüksek derecede spekülatif finansal ortamlara taşınmasının öngörülebilir bir sonucu olduğunu savunmaktadır. Bu nedenle NFT’ler, başarısız bir sanatsal deneyimden ziyade, uzun vadede sanat dünyası ve dijital kültür içerisinde mülkiyet ve değer atfetme biçimlerini yeniden tanımlayan yapısal bir dönüşüm olarak değerlendirilmelidir.
Anahtar Kelimeler Non-Fungible Token’lar (NFT’ler), Dijital Sanat, Sanatsal Özerklik, Otografik ve Alografik Sanat Eserleri, Sanat Piyasası, Abartı Döngüsü (Hype Cycle)
References
- Alice, R. (2024). On quantum. In R. Alice (Ed.), On NFTs (pp. 61–77). Taschen.
- Arreola, P., Gardner, C., & Lenz, M. (2023). Digital art: 1960s–now. Tate Publishing.
- Bailey, J., & Estorick, A. (2025). On crypto art. In R. Alice (Ed.), On NFTs (pp. 102–113). Taschen.
- Benjamin, W. (2008). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction and other writings on media (E. Jephcott, Trans.). Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1nzfgns
- Bishop, C. (2012, September). The digital divide: Claire Bishop on contemporary art and new media. Artforum, 51(1). Retrieved January 5, 2026, from https://www.artforum.com/features/digital-divide-contemporary-art-and-new-media-200814/
- Bouhanna, M., & Chu, J. (2025). On collecting. In R. Alice (Ed.), On NFTs (pp. 495–515). Taschen.
- Buist, K. (2021). Kevin Buist on the NFT boom. Artforum. Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://www.artforum.com/columns/kevin-buist-on-the-nft-boom-249510/
- Connor, M. (2021). Another new world: NFTs aren’t just for cats anymore—What do they mean for digital art? Rhizome. Retrieved December 22, 2025, from https://rhizome.org/editorial/2021/mar/03/another-new-world
- Dash, A., & McCoy, K. (2014). Monegraph [Conference presentation video]. Seven on Seven Conference, New York. Retrieved December 9, 2025, from https://vimeo.com/96131398
- Davis, D. (1995). The work of art in the age of digital reproduction (An evolving thesis: 1991–1995). Leonardo, 28(5), 381–386. https://doi.org/10.2307/1576221 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1576221
- Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. (2024). Effective federal funds rate (FEDFUNDS) [Data set]. FRED. Retrieved January 9, 2026, from https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS
- Gartner, Inc. (n.d.). Hype cycle. Retrieved November 13, 2025, from https://www.gartner.com/en/information-technology/glossary/hype-cycle
- Goodman, N. (1968). Languages of art: An approach to a theory of symbols. Bobbs-Merrill.
- Grossi, L., & Guerrini, L. (2024). NFTs between art and design: A story of digital transformation. In L. Scherling (Ed.), Digital transformation in design: Processes and practices (pp. 113–132). transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839471425-009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839471425-009
- Hayward, A. (2023). NFT sales in 2022 nearly matched the 2021 boom, despite market crash. Decrypt. Retrieved January 13, 2026, from https://decrypt.co/118438/2022-versus-2021-nft-sales
- Hiscox. (2021). The Hiscox online art trade report 2021: Part one. Retrieved January 17, 2026, from https://www.hiscox.co.uk/sites/default/files/documents/2021-10/21674a-Hiscox_online_art_trade_report2021-part_one_1.pdf
- Hiscox. (2022). The Hiscox online art trade report 2021: Part two. Retrieved January 17, 2026, from https://www.hiscox.co.uk/sites/default/files/documents/2022-04/21674b-Hiscox_online_art_trade_report_2021-part_two_1.pdf
- Kemmerer, D. (2025). How much is the NFT market worth? CoinLedger. Retrieved January 5, 2026, from https://coinledger.io/research/how-much-is-the-nft-market-worth
- Lian, C., Ma, Y., & Wang, C. (2019). Low interest rates and risk-taking: Evidence from individual investment decisions. The Review of Financial Studies, 32(6), 2107–2148. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhy111 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhy111
- Nake, F. (1971). There should be no computer art. PAGE: Bulletin of the Computer Arts Society, (18). Retrieved January 3, 2026, from https://dam.org/museum/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Nake1971-there-should-be-no-computer-art.pdf
- Quaranta, D. (2013). Beyond new media art. LINK Editions.
- Stallabrass, J. (2004). Art incorporated: The story of contemporary art. Oxford University Press.