Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Boy Sticks Gum on $1.5M Painting

iMeowbot said:
How does something like this get appraised at $1.5MM?
Click to expand...

Beats me! It seems deserving of having no more than a nickel sized wad placed on it. Sure it is an egregious act of vandalism, but what happened will stick to the 12-year old for a far longer period of time.
 
They should have someone chew three pieces of gum and put it in the boy's hair for a week.

I'd laugh.
 
Art is in the eye of the beholder.

this kid could be the next Cristo, sticking gum on all the great artistic works all over the world.

I know I dont think so, but then again I think Cristo is a jackoff loser muther F****r who gets rich from bull crap he feeds to no thinking artistic types who wear turtlenecks everyday.

CRISTO, WRAP YOURSELF IN PLASTIC AND SEAL YOURSELF IN, NOW THATS ART ID PAY TO SEE.

/rant
 
At the Worcester Museum of Art, in Massachusetts, when I was younger taking an art class there, I saw hanging some "modern art"

one was a 12" square 1" deep piece of pine wood.

wrapped around it was MASKING TAPE in the shape of an X.

price?

$300.
 
Sdashiki said:
this kid could be the next Cristo, sticking gum on all the great artistic works all over the world.
Click to expand...

<sarcasm=just in case...>So this kid has contributed to the art piece, and when it comes time to sell the piece (if ever) the kid ought to demand his fair cut.</sarcasm>

GFLPraxis said:
Am I the only one that thinks this looks like a five year old's finger painting?
Click to expand...

Nope. Some art, I just don't get.
 
excuse me but this kid was 12... i don't know but at 12 it should be obvious that you don't put a gum on a picture in a museum

if the kid was 7 or 8 i would have said tragic and it should have been watched better ... but at 12 the kid is very likely just a prick if he does something like that (i have a younger brother which just turned 14)

and yeah as i worked in a museum as one of those guys watching that nobody touches the pictures i think i can say: please parents with 2-3 kids preferable at the age of 4-7: sure you are proud you're kids can run and are "old enough" for not needing to be held at their hand, but don't be surprised if somebody shouts "STOP" across the room if your kid starts running towards a fragile 400 year old painting or wants to point with a finger on a funny thing/person
 
This incident may bring out new calls for GUM CONTROL. Amidst this publicity, lobbyists on both sides of the issue are going to converge on lawmakers to make their cases heard.

Those on one side will say it's long past time for new serious GUM CONTROL regulations, and that incidents like this one are the obvious result when people are able to carry it around with them, usually concealed.

Those on the other side will say that GUM CONTROL is an overreaction, that our constitutional rights would be infringed by GUM CONTROL, and that GUM doesn't harm paintings, people harm paintings.

Chew on that!
 
Doctor Q said:
Those on the other side will say that GUM CONTROL is an overreaction, that our constitutional rights would be infringed by GUM CONTROL, and that GUM doesn't harm paintings, people harm paintings.
Click to expand...
"...officials say. They say he took a piece of Wrigley's Extra Polar Ice gum out of his mouth and stuck it on Helen Frankenthaler's "The Bay,"
Click to expand...
Change the name of the painting to "Bay Polar", sell it, and use the proceeds to support Gum Control. "When they pry it out from my dead, cold follicles."
 
Doctor Q said:
This incident may bring out new calls for GUM CONTROL. Amidst this publicity, lobbyists on both sides of the issue are going to converge on lawmakers to make their cases heard.

Those on one side will say it's long past time for new serious GUM CONTROL regulations, and that incidents like this one are the obvious result when people are able to carry it around with them, usually concealed.

Those on the other side will say that GUM CONTROL is an overreaction, that our constitutional rights would be infringed by GUM CONTROL, and that GUM doesn't harm paintings, people harm paintings.

Chew on that!
Click to expand...
Well, chewing gum is banned in my country.............
 
Doctor Q said:
This incident may bring out new calls for GUM CONTROL.
Click to expand...
Plus you would have to consider different types of gum, such as a single, double, chicklit, bubble, etc.

And does the particular kind of gum come in singles or multiples, or packaged in an automatic feeder. ;)
 
i love it when people "stick it" to those fools who seem to think a glob of paint can be called art and needs to be valued at millions of dollars. his actions are only as absurd as the notion of the whole painting. <shrugs> everyone's a critic. :p


attachment.php


there are some things money can't buy
for all those last minute parenting lessons... there's mastercard.




:D
 

Attachments

  • artCritic.gif
    artCritic.gif
    72.7 KB · Views: 218
I studied art in college. Mostly classic, which is actually usually good, but some modern. It's supposed to be about challenging the standard definitions of what art is by creating something new. Looking at something like Dali or Picasso you can see what the artist is trying to express, and allows people to use their imaginations to run free rather than just making something realistic and obvious. Others attempted to buck convention by showing that anything can be art, like Warhol.

Stuff like this just makes rich people feel smarter because no one else gets it. Even though most of them don't get it until someone tells them what to think. It's supposed to mean something, but most of the time it's the same thing that's been done a million times before, since before Pollack popularized it. Nowadays it's just pretty colors for people who are bored and have more money than sense who wouldn't know art if it slapped them in the face.
 
sushi said:
What is art?

That is the 64 dollar question. :D
Click to expand...

well yeah, like the whole "what is normal" argument... but i can say that when art is priced that high, i sure hope it took more creativity and effort than my 3 year old kid could do. :p alas, everyone's a critic. :)

solvs said:
I studied art in college. Mostly classic, which is actually usually good, but some modern. It's supposed to be about challenging the standard definitions of what art is by creating something new. Looking at something like Dali or Picasso you can see what the artist is trying to express, and allows people to use their imaginations to run free rather than just making something realistic and obvious. Others attempted to buck convention by showing that anything can be art, like Warhol.

Stuff like this just makes rich people feel smarter because no one else gets it. Even though most of them don't get it until someone tells them what to think. It's supposed to mean something, but most of the time it's the same thing that's been done a million times before, since before Pollack popularized it. Nowadays it's just pretty colors for people who are bored and have more money than sense who wouldn't know art if it slapped them in the face.
Click to expand...

good point. just because something is weird doesn't make it mysterious or intriguing.
 
solvs said:
Stuff like this just makes rich people feel smarter because no one else gets it.
Click to expand...

Right ...

I can't believe how many folks are willing to convict abstraction and uselessness.

As if by making false sense of the world we're really holding on to anything ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back