Whether or not the realm of freedom apparent in the plurality of styles used by contemporary artists is actually a way of concealing its true function, as a slave to business? In contemporary art’s exploration of the human psyche, it appears to hold out no consolation; conventional styles are broken and indiscretions of morals all define the basic contemporary art world orthodoxy. However although contemporary art has reinvented itself this also means that art’s existence now comes in relation to world politics, commerce, consumerism and the worlds of business and finance. In this project I will discuss how art has changed and been shaped by the demands that these external pressure points have put upon it, and what that means for the way we ‘read’ art and treat artists in contemporary culture. I will centre my argument on how the mass consumer culture of our society has lead to the commodification of art. I will focus on the artists Tracy Emin and Damien Hirst, and how both artists have embraced commercial success and celebrity status, buying into the values that art originally transcends, suggesting that they themselves have become a brand name out of which their art is made. The key philosopher that I will be using is Karl Marx and his theory of capitalism. He believed that the continual modernization in industry means that old structures, traditions and attachments begin to dissolve, so that in his famous phrase “all that is solid melts into air.” This can be applied to art’s status which is conventionally and ideally aligned with truth, beauty and ethics but with capitalisms involvement there is a shift from ethics to aesthetics. Contemporary art has become about creating pieces that are morally ambiguous, that promote corporations and entertain the mass culture. I will also be using Guy Debord and his Society of the Spectacle to elaborate on Marx’s theory and explain how he felt art had become commodified and the consequences of this, such as alienation and the loss of art’s function.