Why do we only value art when it’s free? What events like Cj Hendry’s Flower Market reveal about S’poreans’ mindless consumption

Most Singaporeans would rarely give the arts and culture scene a second look on a regular day — but once it’s free, suddenly we’re all lovers of the arts.

Let’s drop the act. The snaking queues and mad rush to grab what’s free gives it away — it’s a clear sign of what patrons are there for, and it isn’t the art or the artist.

This was what played out when Australian contemporary artist Catherine Jenna Hendry’s (Cj Hendry) viral Flower Market installation landed in Singapore from June 10 to 14.

Visitors were seen rushing in, grabbing flowers by the armful, while scalpers listed their hauls swiftly on resale platforms for up to three times the original price just hours after the opening.

As a keen supporter of the arts, I was excited to experience the installation, given its novel concept of recreating the calm, serene flower-picking experience.

But I was quickly turned off when I saw the crowds. It was no longer about the art. These moments exposed how quickly artistic appreciation can give way to consumer instinct when something is offered for free.

Did visitors even know who Hendry was? An Instagram post of their marketing staff chatting with some patrons revealed how many didn’t have a clue — some even assumed she was a man.

Is human behaviour the main exhibit?

Amidst the chaos, I wondered if this was what the artist intended. Was human behaviour meant to be the main exhibit?

Perhaps these responses to her art were just different ways visitors chose to engage with the work, and from another perspective, they might even be a perfectly valid way to experience art.

In all fairness, there were others who had approached it in a more respectful, measured way.

Hendry’s own vision offers an interesting point of comparison. A peek at the exhibition’s press materials summed up the impetus behind the exhibition — to make art genuinely for everyone.

What struck me was that it was originally intended to be a nod to slow living, where visitors are encouraged to browse blooms as they would at a real flower market and create a bouquet of their own.

In an Instagram post on May 19, the artist also explained her decision to keep the exhibition entirely free and offline, saying she felt it was important people “leave their couch when they come and experience something”.

“I’m not saying it’s all going to be good things you’re experiencing and feeling, but you’re going to feel something,” she added.

What it was not meant to be, surely, was a showcase of people’s most selfish instincts.

A 31-year-old art educator and long-time fan of Hendry’s work similarly found it disappointing to see people attending purely for the hype while showing little regard for the art itself.

“I believe that at least half of the visitors didn’t see it as an artwork or artistic experience,” she said, adding that she felt others had just treated the flowers as “commodities”.

Do free things really cultivate artistic appreciation?

The obsession with something “free” has bigger implications than we think. It erodes the respect for artists, where art needs to market itself through complimentary items and discounts because people don’t see the inherent value in it.

And this isn’t the first event to reveal Singaporeans’ complicated relationship with arts and culture.

The National Library Board’s largest giveaway of 60,000 pre-loved books in September 2025 drew massive queues around the Central Library building, prompting people to question if patrons were there because they cared about reading, or if they simply wanted to snag a good deal.

A French impressionist exhibition by the National Gallery in November 2025, Into the Modern: Impressionism from the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, similarly attracted huge crowds during a free-admission weekend held as part of the gallery’s 10th anniversary celebrations, before paid admission kicked in.

We even need initiatives such as the SG Culture Pass to encourage participation in the arts.

But does funnelling discounts and freebies into the sector really cultivate appreciation, or does it reinforce the idea that art only becomes worth engaging with when there’s something tangible to take home?

Why do the arts need to be free for it to be patronised?

Accessibility is important — but so is appreciation

To be fair, there is a dedicated community of people whose love for the arts keeps it alive.

Recent performances I had the chance to catch, such as the Orchestra of the Music Makers’ rendition of Mahler’s Symphony No. 6 and the Singapore Symphony Orchestra’s performance of Dvorak’s Symphony No. 9, were both played to full houses.

That said, the arts should not exist solely for those already invested in them. Accessibility is important, too — paywalls and high prices can sometimes deter others from participating.

It’s important that art reaches people who might not naturally seek it out.

Unfortunately, lower barriers to entry often draws people who cross the boundary into mindless greed and over-consumption.

Instead, let’s take time to learn about the person behind the art, step into their world and experience it as they intended. It’s not always just about the material things we can get from an event.

It’s time we treated the arts with the respect it deserves.

Hot Takes are opinion pieces written by Stomp journalists, based on their personal experiences and viewpoints. They reflect the writer’s perspective and do not necessarily reflect the views of SPH Media.

Have something to say? Join in!

Show all comments