I’m sure everyone is aware of the current situation with our economy, things aren’t exactly doing so well right now. During these tough times, people cut down in spending on the unnecessary stuff. Although a lot of works of art are beautiful, they serve no actual purpose in aiding our survival (unless you are the artist selling the art to make a living, which is a totally different case). In an article that I found titled “Can Art Be ‘Priceless’ in Rocky Times?” I read that a painting by Picasso was sold at $106.5 million dollars at Christie’s this month as the most expensive painting EVER sold in an auction. A sculpture by Giacometti called “Walking Man I” was sold in February for $104.3 million dollars. Maybe it’s the fact that I will most likely never make so much money that I would be able to purchase a painting for over $100 million dollars, but to me, just being able to appreciate the art in places like a museum or maybe even a picture on the internet or a book is enough. Art is not my favorite thing in the world, but I could appreciate and understand its beauty. The painting by Picasso for example is one that I would spend my time looking at and learning about, but I just can’t see myself ever spending that much money on anything. Anyone else have a different opinion on the topic?
-Sandra Lau
Here a link to the article, it includes a picture of both the sculpture and the painting.
I agree with the fact that owning a world-famous work of art is not an asset for survival. However, I can understand why people would spend grotesque amounts of money to possess something unique and – quite simply – FAMOUS. For example, if Lady Gaga suddenly decided to auction off a music notebook of her’s (the one and only copy), I’m pretty confident to say that many people would throw their life-savings at her to get it. But is it necessary, especially in today’s economic standing? Not very.
– Alexandra Nicoletti
This is an important topic. What is the value of an art object? A painting? a sculpture, a piece of music, a dance? We can ponder all of this while we watch helplessly as the market place makes decisions for us. The post on Deas indicates that the relationship between the artist, the artist’s work and the marketplace is complex and unpredictable. the sales of Picasso and Giacometti indicate that it is also quite lucrative (which explains the huge numbers of people willing to take the inherent risks involved.) For now, I think it is most important to keep an open mind, not worry about the monetary value that the marketplace arbitrarily assigns to works of art and (especially for the purposes of the class) make as much effort as possible to see and experience the arts IN PERSON. In a book and on the internet is useful and helpful, but it is not a substitute for being there.
Ask the folks at MoMA how much the @ symbol is worth. Or better yet, for a piece of art that will literally sell itself after you’ve paid for it see “A Tool to Deceive and Slaughter.” http://cgi.ebay.com/Tool-Deceive-and-Slaughter-2009-Caleb-Larsen-/290468711459