"my ten year old brother could do better"

[Shanghai Alice]

QUESTION:

How much did the buyer have to pee away on other things?

 

[bna_li]

I don't know how artistic your parrot is, but I like this. Not saying I'd drop $140 million for it, but it's got nice colors and I find it interesting to look at.

Same here. I don't know what it means, or what it's supposed to convey, but I like the colors =/

 

[ANARCHit3cht]

Art is very subjective. One artists most famous piece was two slits in canvas. Another's was a urinal turned on it's side, signed by him. Sooo, yeah. It depends on who is looking at it. Also, the obscure things like this usually sell for more. Oh, and I was in a museum, and hung on the wall in a case was a piece of bread. Dx SO yeah.

I like this piece's colors, but the style never really gets to me. Dx

 

[Cherrim]

Lol @ Steve's weird censor choices. Oh well.

I love some abstract stuff but others I look at it and go "ohhhhkay then." Studied art in high school so I can at least appreciate a lot of things that most people are absolutely baffled by but I know I personally wouldn't pay absurd amounts of money for it. But it's all personal taste. What seems ugly or really easily-made to me is a masterpiece to someone else. And something I might like (a nice piece of fanart or something, for pure example) might be crap to someone who doesn't like the art style or medium or subject matter. Art is art because it's subjective.

@dragoniteuser: I was gonna comment and say that I actually really like the piece you had in your post and then noticed the signature on it and now all I can think of is Bill Nye the Science Guy painting. orz.

 

[Tribal Ebony]

Personally, I don't clasify that as a work of art. Anybody could pick up a paintbrush or painting tool and scribble around on paper. Think of the money many people in the world would have today if they produced that.

 

[Her]

I don't know, I like abstract art most of the time but this one...it just seems like the artist drew a visual representation of the banana split currently in his stomach.
Though I'm certainly not one to judge; I can barely write legibly, let alone draw.

I suppose the phrase 'takes one to know one' comes to mind here.

 

[Stellar]

I don't claim to understand every abstract piece I see, but I do welcome the genre with open arms. The phrase "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" couldn't apply more to this topic.

I am, however, disgusted by the "artists" who make it big by slapping a few coats of paint on a canvas with no other intention than to sell it for hundreds, even thousands of dollars. Art is a priceless aspect of culture and shouldn't be treated as a way to get rich quick, but unfortunately there are frauds who use the term "abstract" as an excuse to do so.

And as a sidenote, the artist of OP's painting doesn't fall under the above category. It's Jackson ******* who was actually a major figure in the abstract expressionist movement.

EDIT: Right... his last name is censored. Should've known. xD

 

[Sydian]

I love abstract paintings like that, however I don't think they should be priced like that.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

If that's an original Jackson *******, it's because it's a revolution. Nothing like that had ever been done before. He was FEELING art and trying to capture MOVEMENT with paint. It was a new idea and it gave a new perspective on art. That's why it's worth so much.

The value isn't necessarily in the technicality of it.. but rather.. in the idea.


Edit.. the heck? ******* is a censored word? o_o It's a freaking name.

Well its Jackson P0LLOCK if anyone's interested. And I better not get warned for censor bypassing for giving a NAME in history; or that'd just be ridiculous..
But yeah.. look up his art history if you're interested.. it'll give you a bit more insight as to why a painting like this is worth so much money.

Why on earth did you get censored?

But, anyway. It's P0llock. He's a part of pop-culture and was a major leader for contemporary art and abstract expressionism.

His drip paintings or action paintings are, like you said, about capturing movement and a moment in time. There is an intention and purpose behind it. It isn't totally random.

If somebody does it now it wouldn't have the same impact or influence. So, it doesn't really matter if your kid can make a random mess.

*also loves P0llock's work. Did an assignment on him in highschool lol*

 

[femtrooper]

I like abstract works of art...but that's just...sorry, but that's just not that great. It is also not worth $140 million, what the heck? $140 MILLION! Damn. Further more...who would PAY that amount of money for THAT painting...really. Boggles my mind.

 

[Alice]

I just made this. Let's start the bidding at $150 million.

 

[123wert50]

Lol. Even I could do better than that. xD

 

[BHwolfgang]

The artwork does look nice, and I'd totally buy it to hang up somewhere in my room. However, there's no way that I'll be willing to pay 140 million dollars for it. That amount is just ludicrous, and I still can't believe that someone paid that much for this artwork.

I appreciate how abstract the artwork is, and it is indeed interesting. Art can be created by anyone, no matter what. Someone might appreciate it but others might not.

.. Still, 140 million dollars. That is a lot of money.

 

[SquirtleGirl]

You think that's bad, at least that painting has colour! I was at the Guugenheim museum in Bilbao in spain. There's a canvas there worth something ridiculous and it is a white canvas...with a CIRCLE drawn on it. That was it. No hidden meaning, no espression of art, nothing. A freakin' circle. :P Even I can admit that's ridiculous and I adore art.

But then again I've been to the National Gallery in London and although they are good paintings and worth the canvas they're painted on, I wouldnt pay whatever million to have a portrait of Moses with his head cut off either :P I'd rather have the squiggles ^^'

 

[Captain Hobo.]

I have done something like that before. XD

140 million bucks for that people are idiots.

 

[A Pixy]

Don't quote me on this one, but I think a museum bought a painting for 1 million dollars.

It just a red stripe down the middle of the canvas.

So yeah, BEE ESS.

 

[Alice]

Those are only famous because someone famous made them. I forget who it was... someone super famous. He went out and set up to start painting something, and drew one line in black, and then shot himself. Yeah, that thing SHOULD be famous/worth a lot.

And there's another really super famous painting that is just a solid white canvas. I saw that on Jeopardy lol.

 

[Roxichu]

Spoiler:

the above painting was sold for a whopping $140 mil, believe it or not. the value of artwork is subjective, but i have a tough time recognizing the value of some works- particularly muddy works like this that manage to reel in dough despite being produced with little effort/creativity. have you encountered some pieces that you felt received more recognition than deserved and how do situations like this make you feel? what do you think of treating art as a material commodity?

You think that's bad? The art museum in my town has whole display of "art" that's nothing more than watercolor splashed on looseleaf paper.

Personally, I'm glad no-talent crud like this can sell, because I plan to make a lot of money selling stuff like that and telling people it has some deep artistic meaning. :bandit:

Sucker every minute...

 

[Guillermo]

There was some guy who sold art that wasn't drawn with a paintbrush, but he drank some stuff and then threw up on an empty canvas and it was all colourful. As gross as it is, it looked pretty awesome.

I like that picture because it's colourful, buuut $140 million is a little much. I've never really understood what makes 'good art' and what makes 'bad art' because all I look for is colours.

 

[Idiot!]

Who bought it? How many people wanted to?

At least as someone who had weird tastes, I can understand why it was bought for so much. Maybe the texture of the painting had something to do with it. Just because you can't appreciate it doesn't mean someone else can't.