Silkroad Online Forums

Walking around Miami Beach last weekend, taking in the 10th edition of its extravagant Art Basel art fair, you sensed something strange in the air. Patou’s “Joy” drifting off the pashmina? Polished walnut wafting out of the Bentleys? More basic than either: the ineffable aroma of money itself, rising from the art out for sale. By the end of the first day, a customer at Mary Boone’s booth had spent *see spoiler* for a pile of battered stools turned into a nest—by Ai Weiwei. A blue lozenge on a white rectangle—by Ellsworth Kelly, on view at Matthew Marks—had gone for $1.5 million. A glass cabinet full of surgical instruments, by Damien Hirst, had sold for nearly $2.5 million at White Cube’s stand. Despite the big names attached to these objects—and whatever their artistic worth—any normal observer would immediately wonder: Stools, for half a million dollars? Three times that for some plain paint on canvas? Why is art so damned expensive?



READ THE REST HERE: http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2 ... nsive.html

Assuming the stools themselves aren't some kind of stupidly overpriced brand themselves. I wouldn't pay over $4500 as I assume that is their price and cost for the glue. This is something you could probably just make yourself easily and save major cash.
Modern art is simply:
> "I could make that"
< "Yeah, but you didn't"

So any smart person should just think "yet".

Art is expensive cause it's mainly for collectors and royalty. Royalty want to see themselves on their walls. The artists, knowing this, asked for a high price, they're still the only ones who can draw it after all. Once the royalty paid lots, they couldn't just lower the prices for the poorer folks. So all the collectors became rich as well. And thus the prices are stupid.

The lowest option is 4,500$ o.O
I wouldn't pay even 200$ for that.

I wouldn't even buy stools. They are easy to make myself.

The prices are quite subjective. In this case, the stools have some form of historical significance and controversy surrounding them - which is emphasized by the media and supported by the "art world". Hence, the steep price tag of nearly $600k. Ridiculous as it sounds, that's basically what the art world is.

A perfect example would be Piero Manzoni's "Merda d'artista" - literally - "Artist's Shit". If you think you know what it is... you're probably correct. Personally, I'd pay someone to get it out of my house but one person actually paid €124,000 for a can of human feces.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist%27s_shit



In other news, for fans of Amy Sol's work who didn't buy anything form her yesterday, weep.

Limited edition of 50 prints. Each one embellished with real gold dust and sold for $130 each. the sale went on for less than 1 minute before everything was sold out. Talk about demand.

> "I could do that"
< "Yeah, but you didn't"
> "Dude ಠ_ಠ"

EDIT
Ooh that second one is nice :o
and $130 is a very reasonable price for art like that. If I lived alone I'd possibly buy it. how big is that btw?

It's such a crazy world. Seriously.. what will he do with it ?

About 17x12". It's already going for $250+ in pre-delivery auctions. I might hunt one down in a few months. Hopefully they'd still be under $500.

@BlackFox:
2Girls1TinCan

Nothing, you know, art has no practical purpose. But i wouln't consider everything, that has no practical purpose, art, as you can see.

I kind of agree with you on that. But.. can anyone explain why this "shit" cost so much compared to stools?
It Just doesn't make sense!.. lulz

I would use that can of shit to smell on, nothing beats a sunny day on the hill smelling on a can of human shit.

When I read "battered old stools" I thought of stool as in 'stool sample'...