This exploration began with a discussion between a friend and me. We were considering the well-documented progression of many abstract painters who started their careers creating more representative art, often with considerable skill. Their journey into abstraction was not a sudden leap but a deliberate investigation, a quest to express ideas and sensations in a way that realistic imagery could not capture. This evolution is often visible and progressive throughout their body of work. It is also common that an artist's most celebrated creations emerge towards the end of this iterative process.

This realization highlights a crucial, yet often overlooked, aspect of artistic creation: the immense investment of time dedicated to practice, experimentation, and contemplation. This intense activity is condensed into a final artwork that can be experienced in moments, a few seconds for a painting, sculpture, or photograph, a few hours for a film or a book. At times, this condensation of effort is so dense that a novice observer may not fully grasp its significance. In such cases, the insights of critics and guides become essential to contextualize the artwork, explaining the artist's process and the work's historical importance.

The analogy to the "proof of work" concept in cryptocurrency could end here, but further reflection reveals deeper parallels. A primary question arises: if every artwork is the culmination of countless hours of refinement, why do the prices of an artist's works vary, and why are there significant price differences between the works of similar artists? The conclusion I've drawn is that in this comparison, the "mined block" is not each individual artwork. Instead, it is the select few pieces that are deemed pivotal to the advancement of their art form, making them virtually priceless.

Why is this the case? Not every artwork or artist manages to perfectly encapsulate the resonance of its context or discipline. This is where a competition, analogous to proof of work, unfolds. Each artist, in their own way, strives to capture the essence of their domain. These "artwork blocks" represent a condensed understanding of their time, a mastery of technique or method, and a dialogue with the art that came before.

This final point of comparison addresses the concept of artistic lineage. It is often said that every creation is inspired by another and that nothing is truly "created" in a vacuum. This is where the "chaining" in our analogy becomes apparent. An "artwork block" can only be "mined" if the artist has meaningfully incorporated a vast array of references that are consistent with their discipline, thereby influencing the work they create. Without this meaningful integration, the artwork would not be considered notable or important, it would not be an "artwork block."

Whether one appreciates art or not, understanding the value proposition of Bitcoin and its foundation in proof of work can offer a new lens through which to comprehend the immense value attributed to certain artworks. In a way, the Bitcoin protocol is more straightforward because the outcome of the "work" is immediately and objectively verified. The artistic process, on the other hand, generates a vast number of creations that are art but not "artwork blocks." Furthermore, identifying an "artwork block" is an incredibly difficult and subjective process over once it's done, the value remains, for centuries.