Check out the “speech”:http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/features/story/0,11710,1230169,00.html made by art critic Robert Hughes at Burlington House last night, and note the following judgment:
bq. I don’t want to disparage dealers, collectors or museum directors, by the way. But I don’t think there is any doubt that the present commercialisation of the art world, at its top end, is a cultural obscenity. When you have the super-rich paying $104m for an immature Rose Period Picasso – close to the GNP of some Caribbean or African states – something is very rotten. Such gestures do no honour to art: they debase it by making the desire for it pathological. As Picasso’s biographer John Richardson said to a reporter on that night of embarrassment at Sotheby’s, no painting is worth a hundred million dollars.
I wonder what they’ll make of that over at “Marginal Revolution”:http://www.marginalrevolution.com/ ?
{ 17 comments }
nnyhav 06.03.04 at 6:45 pm
You’re a month late wondering.
Dan Simon 06.03.04 at 6:52 pm
I thought art critics were forbidden to complain about any “obscenity”, on pain of being derided as narrow-minded moralists.
Lance Boyle 06.03.04 at 7:33 pm
No metal is worth $827 an ounce.
And the difference between a US $5 bill and a $20 is, aesthetically, non-existent.
Hughes attacks the symptom as it reaches into his domain, but the pathology that caused it’s been here for a long time.
I agree with him completely, though I think John Berger would be a good place to turn next, for a more accurately drawn perspective.
bryan 06.03.04 at 8:27 pm
So dollars are possessed of some sort of intrinsic value, thereby allowing us to say that no art will ever be worth 100 million of the dollars. I suppose that art then has intrinsic value as well, but it is value with a ceiling to it. I wonder what that ceiling is. I think it’s nice though that we can compare the worth of these two things, they are clearly related. somehow.
So what is the monetary value of a caribbean islander? From the anecdote I think it seems likely we know what that is as well.
Cap'n Arbyte 06.03.04 at 8:28 pm
Lance, what do you mean, “no metal is worth $827 an ounce”? Platinum closed at exactly that price today. What were you trying to say by that?
nnyhav 06.03.04 at 9:24 pm
Q: So what’s the difference between an option and an option trader?
A: An option can have intrinsic value.
(Immature joke derivative of difference between bond and bond trader.)
Lance Boyle 06.03.04 at 10:56 pm
That was in the post there Cap’n.
Symbolically:
Paper in certain shapes=$$
Metal of certain types=$$
Art by certain artists=$$
None of the symbol sets have an intrinsic general worth. It’s imbued. Or inoculated. Or something.
Just to keep things loopy – the silicone breast-augmentation so popular in some parts of the world now is another demonstration of precisely this abstraction of value.
Women have it done because it makes them attractive, to men and to each other, and it makes them attractive to men for the same tautological reason. Because all of them are taking their cues from each other, drifting on a timeline none of them are aware of, that goes undeviatingly from the natural world to an entirely incorporeal reality in which no human thing will matter.
Large breasts once mattered because feeding children once mattered. That value has been entirely abstracted from its original organic cause.
There’s an occult use of gold that made it the standard for a long time. Platinum, its heir, is more technological than arcane, though it’s maybe because the one has merged with the other.
How’s that?
seth edenbaum 06.04.04 at 12:56 am
As the real estate agent said to my friend about the shack he was looking at in the california desert: “It’s not worth anything until someone wants it.”
—
Hughes is being silly, but he’s right about the Picasso. The Manet on the next wall was better and was set to go at under 30.
As far as ‘Marginal Revolution’ is concerned, I read the first sentence of Tyler Cowen’s book on markets and the arts and shook my head. He missed it entirely.
The arts describe the world as it is experienced by people. If the world is-econommically politically- static, the culture is static.
‘Culture’ always follows. Those who think otherwise always end up the forces of reaction.
In Japan in the 80’s there was a bubble economy in paintings by Marie Laurincin
Then it popped.
—
At what point does greed become vulgar? Greed is always vulgar.
But it’s always with us.
Picasso got a group of investors together in 1914(?) for the purpose of speculating in his own work.
They sold everything a few years later and did very well.
I know a couple who got one of the prizes of the spring auctions.
They paid 7 M. I think it’s absurd to have that much money, let alone spend it on a piece of welded steel.
But I’ll get to touch it.
And considering that Hughes is a drunk who got away with murder, literally,-vehicular homicide- I don’t want to hear him moralize about anything.
seth edenbaum 06.04.04 at 12:58 am
As the real estate agent said to my friend about the shack he was looking at in the california desert: “It’s not worth anything until someone wants it.”
—
Hughes is being silly, but he’s right about the Picasso. The Manet on the next wall was better and was set to go at under 30.
As far as ‘Marginal Revolution’ is concerned, I read the first sentence of Tyler Cowen’s book on markets and the arts and shook my head. He missed it entirely.
The arts describe the world as it is experienced by people. If the world is-econommically politically- static, the culture is static.
‘Culture’ always follows. Those who think otherwise always end up the forces of reaction.
In Japan in the 80’s there was a bubble economy in paintings by Marie Laurincin
Then it popped.
—
At what point does greed become vulgar? Greed is always vulgar.
But it’s always with us.
Picasso got a group of investors together in 1914(?) for the purpose of speculating in his own work.
They sold everything a few years later and did very well.
I know a couple who got one of the prizes of the spring auctions.
They paid 7 M. I think it’s absurd to have that much money, let alone spend it on a piece of welded steel.
But I’ll get to touch it.
And considering that Hughes is a drunk who got away with murder, literally,-vehicular homicide- I don’t want to hear him moralize about anything.
seth edenbaum 06.04.04 at 12:59 am
As the real estate agent said to my friend about the shack he was looking at in the california desert: “It’s not worth anything until someone wants it.”
—
Hughes is being silly, but he’s right about the Picasso. The Manet on the next wall was better and was set to go at under 30.
As far as ‘Marginal Revolution’ is concerned, I read the first sentence of Tyler Cowen’s book on markets and the arts and shook my head. He missed it entirely.
The arts describe the world as it is experienced by people. If the world is-econommically politically- static, the culture is static.
‘Culture’ always follows. Those who think otherwise always end up the forces of reaction.
In Japan in the 80’s there was a bubble economy in paintings by Marie Laurincin
Then it popped.
—
At what point does greed become vulgar? Greed is always vulgar.
But it’s always with us.
Picasso got a group of investors together in 1914(?) for the purpose of speculating in his own work.
They sold everything a few years later and did very well.
I know a couple who got one of the prizes of the spring auctions.
They paid 7 M. I think it’s absurd to have that much money, let alone spend it on a piece of welded steel.
But I’ll get to touch it.
And considering that Hughes is a drunk who got away with murder, literally,-vehicular homicide- I don’t want to hear him moralize about anything.
seth edenbaum 06.04.04 at 12:59 am
As the real estate agent said to my friend about the shack he was looking at in the california desert: “It’s not worth anything until someone wants it.”
—
Hughes is being silly, but he’s right about the Picasso. The Manet on the next wall was better and was set to go at under 30.
As far as ‘Marginal Revolution’ is concerned, I read the first sentence of Tyler Cowen’s book on markets and the arts and shook my head. He missed it entirely.
The arts describe the world as it is experienced by people. If the world is-econommically politically- static, the culture is static.
‘Culture’ always follows. Those who think otherwise always end up the forces of reaction.
In Japan in the 80’s there was a bubble economy in paintings by Marie Laurincin
Then it popped.
—
At what point does greed become vulgar? Greed is always vulgar.
But it’s always with us.
Picasso got a group of investors together in 1914(?) for the purpose of speculating in his own work.
They sold everything a few years later and did very well.
I know a couple who got one of the prizes of the spring auctions.
They paid 7 M. I think it’s absurd to have that much money, let alone spend it on a piece of welded steel.
But I’ll get to touch it.
And considering that Hughes is a drunk who got away with murder, literally,-vehicular homicide- I don’t want to hear him moralize about anything.
Lance Boyle 06.04.04 at 6:39 am
seth e.-
I’d like to publicly thank you for making me look like the soul of brevity, here.
Though I would insist that drunks and murderers, guilty or merely accused, free or captive, should have as much right to moralize as anyone, and publicly if they so choose.
There is an arrogance in your assumption, that your not wanting to hear Hughes speak means anything at all to anyone but yourself and your immediate social environment, an arrogance I could do without quite happily, though I’d never suggest you be prevented from expressing it, or anything else you feel the need to get off your chest.
dsquared 06.04.04 at 8:39 am
Just on a technical point, I don’t think that there are any African or Carribean states with a GNP of $104m. If one were to assume that every single person in a state were at the World Bank poverty line, then you would still get more than $104m as long as the state had more than 300,000 inhabitants. There might be some tiny South Pacific states which are this small, but no African or Caribbean ones.
seth edenbaum 06.04.04 at 1:24 pm
Hughes has the right to an opinion. I said he does not have a right to arrogance over questions of morality.
Sseziwa Mukasa 06.04.04 at 10:11 pm
On the GNP of selected tiny Caribbean states
(pop < 100000): Commonwealth of Dominica $298 million St Vincent and the Grenadines $198 million Montserrat $137 million So yes, $104 is still safely below the GNP of a tiny Caribbean state, but I'd be willing to take bets that a painting will be sold for a sum greater than the GNP of Montserrat within a decade.
Matt 06.07.04 at 12:43 am
Just to note– Hughes’ comment was a throw-away line in the middle of an interesting speech about something else entirely. Worth reading.
dsquared 06.07.04 at 7:09 am
sseziwa: you’re probably right; the population of Monserrat is dropping like a brick as everyone who can afford a ticket to get away from that ominously smoking mountain buys one …
Comments on this entry are closed.