This piece of rubbish sold for $54 million

Argument? There is no argument here, just opinions on a given subject.

your response then

er, response to what, honey?

I just didn't get how what you said to me, when you adressed me a few posts ago related to what I had said. That's all.

Do you mean this response, P.Q.?

P.Q., art is an individualized thing. Just as poetry and music, it speaks to different people in different ways. What one may like today, may change tomorrow. Let's call it a variation on a theme. Often I feel that the truly great artist recognizes the dilettante in the viewer or listener, and panders to that. Frankly, I like Starry Night, but only because Don McLean sang so beautifully about it.

I am not certain how I could elaborate further.

Arg!
Don't worry about it.

Why some paintings bring such astronomical prices is anybody's guess. It's doesn't necessarily mean that the paintings are better. It's just the snowball effect, apparantly. They're no longer art; they're investments. I'm glad that music doesn't bring the same high prices, even original musical scores. Imagine having to pay $50,000,000 to hear a Beethoven symphony. Now that would be insane.

I remember that some years ago in Dallas a number of contempory Russian painters had an exhibition and were apalled that the potential buyers seemed to be more interested in the financial value of the paintings than the heart and soul of the works.

It's both the the one-of-a-kind factor and the degree to which the piece defines a particular 'period' of an artist's body of work (i.e. Picasso's Blue Period) that makes it worth so much. And often, the piece is an excellent example of a particular school of art, i.e. Dadaism, Cubism, etc. Rarely, does a piece stand alone. There are only a few pieces, i.e. the Mona Lisa, that has transcended above all other works of its time.

It's also about who the artist is - the role they played and the influence they had on the course and direction that art has taken. Farmerman pointed out that "Van Gogh presages modernism... "

"Masterpieces" are about what and who they represent, not whether the 'Average Joe' likes them or not. One has to realize, from an impersonal point of view, that when we are talking about the world of high art, we are talking about a form of elitism and a world that is very political.

Re: This piece of rubbish sold for $54 million


That looks like some gaudy crap my great grandma would hank on her wall.

Van Gogh Shman Gogh!

I think Picasso is overrated to. SO THERE.

I completely agree, I think thats the most sensible thing anyone has said on this thread.

Amigo, can you explain why picasso is overated? Or do you just dislike him. I don't particually like his cubist works, but I don't deny their brilliance. I think there is a difference.

The man who created what is probably the masterpiece of the 20th Century did become a hack after painting this mural.

http://www.pbs.org/treasuresoftheworld/a_nav/guernica_nav/main_guerfrm.html

It doesn't diminish the fact that during his lifetime, he WAS modern art.

A bad reproduction of "Sunflowers" by Van Gogh. Ya still have to go to a museum and see the work in person, not poorly reproduced images.

Maybe the world is not worthy of a masterpiece and to become a "hack" is really to exploit the idiot masses for the only thing there worth.

I tink everybody should visit my thread starting with Lightwizard.....he's a big bafoon.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=73270&highlight=

Hey!

Picasso didn't exploit the masses, he exploited the rich and famous. I think that has some merit to it! He did not produce any art of any significance after the Mediterranean Suite of 1941, a series of etchings.

The pottery was the biggest joke, and it was produced for the nuevo riche who didn't know any better but to buy it. The very wealthy had art experts on the payroll. I'm sure it's gained in value but finding a buyer is the trick.

That Japanese businessman who paid so much for "Irises" likely was not well advised. Of course, it was purchased in the late 80's and the art market went with the course of the stock market. Art became deflated for nearly four years.

I think CI is thinking of the forgery of one of the versions of "Sunflowers" (Van Gogh painted several images) which was just about to be sold to some rich fool when somehow he found that the actual original was hanging in the Chicago Art Institute at the time. Whooops!

Interesting post Lightwizard.