This is an interesting proposition, and after some thought, I find it quite insightful. We can understand it this way:
First, what is "art"? A Van Gogh painting, in essence, is just some paint on a canvas. Why is it worth so much money? Because behind it lies a story, emotion, unique creativity, and most importantly, a consensus reached by a group of people (the entire art world and market) who believe it holds that value. The value of a work of art is, to a large extent, a product of consensus.
Now, let's look at Bitcoin. In essence, it's just a string of code, lines of numbers. It has no gold reserves behind it, no national credit endorsement. So why is it valuable? Because it also has a set of ingenious rules (code), a groundbreaking concept (decentralization), and most importantly, a consensus reached by a group of people who believe it has value and are willing to exchange real money for it.
You see, from the perspective that "value stems from consensus," aren't Bitcoin and works of art quite similar?
So why is it called "meta-art"?
The word "meta" means "about itself." For example, "meta-fiction" is fiction about the act of "writing fiction," and "meta-film" is a film about "making films." Therefore, "meta-art" can be understood as "art about art itself."
Now let's connect them:
A regular work of art, like a painting, might have a landscape, a figure, or a story as its theme. The artist uses the medium of canvas and paint to express their views on these themes.
And Bitcoin? The theme of this "work" is not something else; it is precisely "value" itself.
Satoshi Nakamoto (Bitcoin's creator) didn't use paint and canvas; the medium used was code, cryptography, and economic models. What was created was not something that could be hung on a wall, but a complete, self-operating system. The sole purpose of this system's birth was to explore and practice one question: How do we create, store, and transfer value without a central authority?
So, Bitcoin, this "work," doesn't paint mountains or rivers; its theme, which it explores and practices, is "value" itself. It's like a piece of performance art, or rather, conceptual art:
- The Creator: The mysterious artist "Satoshi Nakamoto," whose true identity remains unknown, which in itself is full of artistic mystique.
- The Work Itself: A decentralized, code-based global financial network that has been continuously operating for over a decade. This "artwork" is alive, with hundreds of millions of people worldwide participating in it daily.
- Art Criticism: Economists, financial magnates, tech geeks, and ordinary investors worldwide discuss it, analyze it, and price it every day. These discussions themselves become part of this artwork.
- The Reflection It Prompts in the Audience: It forces everyone who encounters it to rethink: What exactly is money? Where does trust come from? What is the essence of value?
Therefore, saying that Bitcoin is "meta-art" about "value" itself, I think this analogy is quite apt. It's not art to be "seen" with your eyes, but conceptual art to be "thought about" with your mind and "participated in" with real money. In an extremely extreme and pure way, it vividly demonstrates the process of how "value is generated through consensus" before us.