Piece of crap sells for fortune

[Just_Believe18]

Now considered perhaps the most expensive painting ever sold:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061102/ap_on_en_ot/world_s_priciest_painting

NEW YORK - It may well be the world's most expensive painting — ever. But nobody's talking about it, except in whispers — especially not the office of entertainment mogul David Geffen, who reportedly sold the Jackson Pollock work for about $140 million.

Geffen's business manager in Los Angeles, Richard Sherman, would not accept a telephone call when contacted Thursday by The Associated Press.

"No. 5, 1948" — as the work is called — has been owned by some of the world's richest men over the years, including S. I. Newhouse Jr., the New York publishing magnate, who had sold it to Geffen.

The $140 million price would be the highest ever for a painting, topping the $135 million cosmetics heir Ronald S. Lauder paid in June for a Gustav Klimt painting titled "Adele Bloch-Bauer I."

I lol'ed.

 

[looseliam]

And there are families that have to choose between heat and food.




And OMG I've seen shit that looks like that painting in the subway.

 

[dpnice]

Feminist revaluation of Pollock looked askance at the machismo of the 'hero in the studio' and tended to see the whole drip and flick performance as the acting out of the phallocentric male fantasy on the symbolically supine canvas.

Other critics, such as Craig Brown, have been astonished that decorative 'wallpaper', essentially brainless, could gain such a position in art history alongside Giotto, Titian and Velazquez.

Reynolds News in a 1959 headline said 'This is not art--it's a joke in bad taste'
http://justusboys.com/forum/
What the experts said about it. Well those that had a brain that is.

 

[Just_Believe18]

Pay me just a million of those dollars and I'll piss, poop, and rub whatever else with my bare hands over a canvas and make you a masterpiece over that garbage of a painting.

 

[frankfrank]

One Hundred Forty MILLION dollars???

It shouldn't have gone for more than $110 to $115 million.

 

[cocktales]

Just remember: Art is always in the eyes of the beholder........One man's painting is another man's painting "drop-cloth"!

 

[jimm04]

Still Crazy

http://www.jacksonpollock.org/

 

[dpnice]

Re: Still Crazy

http://www.jacksonpollock.org/

Cool website.
Here is my "Pollack" what am I offered.

 

[belamy]

This is not new, not news, it was invented time ago, and the practice was ultimately sanctified by the selling of the Merda d´Artista.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist's_shit

When you insist so strongly on the on the other hand undisputable "social imprint" of art, this is one of the stations at the end of the road.

 

[belamy]

Re: Still Crazy

Cool website.
Here is my "Pollack" what am I offered.

Pollock may be considered shit, but yours is MEDIOCRE shit.

 

[belamy]

Just remember that some people pay hundreds of thousands even millions for compressed chunks of carbon. Paintings like this have revolutionized the world we live in today. Jackson Pollock opened our eyes, questioned politics and challanged some of the very basis of our society. In my opinion, this peice of art is well worth it.

Right, but archeological shit has the backing of scientism

 

[star-warrior]

More corprolites, please!

 

[unclaimedblessing]

Just because someone has the money to buy a painting like that doesn't mean they have good taste or a education/background in art.
Frequently it is just to boast "I have a ______original!"
Others consider it just an investment.
I've seen just plain black (or other colors) square canvases in art galleries selling for hundreds. I always think the "artist" must laugh all the way to the bank.

 

[eddielee]

140 million for a painting that looks like rotting wall paper. It must be nice being rich enough to piss money away on "fine art".

 

[belamy]

No, no, no ... this is the kind of drivel that is taught in art class. You are asked 'What is art' and then told precisely what to think. To say that Pollock and the like 'revolutionized the world we live in today' and that 'Jackson Pollock opened our eyes, questioned politics and challanged some of the very basis of our society' is bollocks. It is rhetoric espoused by some and taught to others as gospel. Ask yourself, how did Pollock revolutionise the world ... the world mind you, not how some other artists were led down this blind alley of expressionism. How did he open our eyes. I would suggest that 99% of the world population has never heard of Jackson Pollock, so whose eyes have been opened exactly? Free your mind, don't believe the hype and think for yourself.

 

[Just_Believe18]

Paintings like this have revolutionized the world we live in today. Jackson Pollock opened our eyes, questioned politics and challanged some of the very basis of our society. In my opinion, this peice of art is well worth it.

If you can prove it, I'll believe you.

 

[levenshulme31]

It is very bizarre the arbitrary way in which certain things are valued.
$140,000,000 for what is essentially maybe $20 worth of materials and a few hours of the artist's time is quite staggering. Although to be honest, at that level, the numbers become meaningless, they are simply different levels of obscene. If it were $1 million it would be ridiculous and beyond the means of 99% of the world's population so another £139 million is academic.

However, if the very wealthy Mexican who has bought the pic had settled for a nice print of it, maybe he could have spent his $140 million in Mexico to help alleviate some of the poverty which is forcing so many of his countrymen to cross the border in search of a living. (I know, a hint of socialism, my bad).

 

[Nonimus]

140 Million? Pollocks!

 

[Soilwork]

For people who know little about art or art history, yes... i suppose that looks like a jumbled mess.

For those who understand who Jackson Pollack was one of the people who advanced art and broke broundaries and was a role model for artists for generatons, well, that painting is more than just $20 of materials (and it's considerably more than $20, by the way, but I digress).

Artists like Picasso and Pollack and Mark Rothko were the ones who forced us to stop trying to just create paintings of real things and start to paint in abstract.

And really.. I get so sick of this "Why can't they donate all their money to help starving children?" Women spend about $3 billion dollars a year on lipstick... why not complain to them?

 

[belamy]

(...)

For those who understand who Jackson Pollack was one of the people who advanced art and broke boundaries and was a role model for artists for generations, well, that painting is more than just $20 of materials (and it's considerably more than $20, by the way, but I digress).

(...)

And really.. I get so sick of this "Why can't they donate all their money to help starving children?" Women spend about $3 billion dollars a year on lipstick... why not complain to them?

Like I have said sometime before, Soilwork could have been my hero after all