Are NFTs The Future of Digital Art?

You may have recently heard of the first ever tweet being sold for more than $2 million. Or the digital art piece valued at $69 million. Or perhaps the ‘Nyan Cat’ GIF that was sold for $560k. Or even the $500k ‘Disaster Girl’ meme NFT, or the countless other examples of the new NFT craze.

So, what exactly is a Non-fungible token? To understand NFTs, one must also understand the blockchain, which is essentially a digital ledger where monetary transactions are publicly recorded and legitimised by a large network of computer systems; think of it as hundreds of computers carrying out the job of a bank, but online for everyone to see. NFTs, then, are units of data (photos, videos, audios, etc.) that are stored on a blockchain, and are certified to be unique, meaning they are not interchangeable; they are non-fungible.

When examining the rise of NFTs as an art movement, it becomes difficult to compare it to any previous movements by virtue of its dependency on technology that has only recently gained popularity, although some attribute the appeal of NFTs to characteristics that were also found in the early 2010s trend of “Zombie Formalism”. Zombie Formalism comprised experimental abstract art wherein artists heavily focused on catering to the demands of wealthy art collectors, so as to enable them to attach the biggest possible price tags to their pieces. The novelty and unreasonably prices of these pieces is where their perceived value lies, which is a quality that seems to be shared by NFTs; repeatedly, the art market has looked to pieces that seem unique, and cost outrageous sums of money, and concluded that they must hold significant value.

Although generally, purchasing obscure and sometimes expensive art pieces can stem from a deeper and more personal connection with the piece than is immediately obvious, as Tamara Almoayed explains superbly in her article ‘Art that broke social bounds’, it is evident that the motivations behind the biggest NFT purchases are purely monetary, as buyers aim to make profit through selling their pieces once prices rise.

Furthermore, with the growth of NFTs, and more widespread use of blockchain technology at large, have come fallacious claims of environmental sustainability, as many point to the superficial explanation that traditional art relies on a vast quantity of physical materials being extracted from natural resources, and thus digital art must be a viable sustainable alternative. It is important to note, however, that the functionality of blockchains depends on hundreds of computers stored at a warehouse performing micro-calculations all day, every day, which evidently requires a sizable amount of electricity. Electricity is typically generated by power plants burning fossil fuels, which, as we should all be aware, are the biggest contributors to global warming. The electricity consumption of Ethereum, the blockchain where most NFTs are stored, has quadrupled in the span of only eight months, and continues to grow, currently operating at 33 terawatt hours of electricity, which is the same amount of electricity that powers the entire country of Serbia.

This is part of the reason why it is difficult to gauge what will become of NFTs once the excitement dies down; are NFTs the inevitable future of digital art, or is this simply a fad that will disappear as other trends arrive to replace it? Blockchain technology certainly seems to have the potential to revolutionise the way we go about exchanging money, although some argue that NFTs may not necessarily be fated for the same long-term success. In market as volatile as that of the art industry, it is generally unwise to bank on the success of a particular trend, so while there is a chance NFTs will persevere and replace traditional art, it is also entirely possible that in a few years’ time, NFTs will be a tale of the past.

By Rose Salib