• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Lichtenstein Comic Inspired Art Estimated at $35-45 Million
2 2

701 posts in this topic

Great points.

 

As an aside I would venture to guess there is a lot of 4. and 5. in fine art as well.

 

 

 

A TON in fine art.

 

Go on a job interview for a job with Sotheby's Contemporary Art Department or MOMA and espouse negativity towards Lichtenstein and see how long the interview lasts.

 

There's too much money to be made, and too much already invested in certain areas of fine art to EVER let the tenor switch from idol worship to anything else.

 

precisely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like you would need to pass a litmus test in the finer points in "art" to participate in this very exclusive conversation. This isn’t a meeting of the board of the Met, its talk about "comic book art" for goodness sakes - or "non-art", since, as you mentioned, it’s not really art.

 

My response was to the line "I wish there was a forum where we could have intelligent debates about the art itself". To participate in the "exclusive conversation" as you put it, one would need to be able to have a discussion without being offended, know what it is they actually appreciate about the art itself without emotional attachment and be able to articulate it. In my experience on public forums these discussions don't last long before it becoming about values, nostalgia or some troll crashes it. If you've had a different experience online then I'm glad for you. I'd love to be proven wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

yeah, we've all seen it. Just try and fairly critique John Byrne's work and see how long that lasts. Heaven forbid someone say he isn't quite the artist he once was - some of the Byrnies will attack with fangs bared. Because, no doubt, they realize it to be true.

 

Never mind that the great, great majority of artists' work declines in quality past a certain age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on a job interview for a job with Sotheby's Contemporary Art Department or MOMA and espouse negativity towards Lichtenstein and see how long the interview lasts.

Even better is go in there and talk about your love for Thomas Kinkade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on a job interview for a job with Sotheby's Contemporary Art Department or MOMA and espouse negativity towards Lichtenstein and see how long the interview lasts.

Even better is go in there and talk about your love for Thomas Kinkade.

 

 

But only his paintings with "fiber optic" lighting included. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like you would need to pass a litmus test in the finer points in "art" to participate in this very exclusive conversation. This isn’t a meeting of the board of the Met, its talk about "comic book art" for goodness sakes - or "non-art", since, as you mentioned, it’s not really art.

 

My response was to the line "I wish there was a forum where we could have intelligent debates about the art itself". To participate in the "exclusive conversation" as you put it, one would need to be able to have a discussion without being offended, know what it is they actually appreciate about the art itself without emotional attachment and be able to articulate it. In my experience on public forums these discussions don't last long before it becoming about values, nostalgia or some troll crashes it. If you've had a different experience online then I'm glad for you. I'd love to be proven wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

yeah, we've all seen it. Just try and fairly critique John Byrne's work and see how long that lasts. Heaven forbid someone say he isn't quite the artist he once was - some of the Byrnies will attack with fangs bared. Because, no doubt, they realize it to be true.

 

Never mind that the great, great majority of artists' work declines in quality past a certain age.

 

Do you think that the large amount of recent mediocre Byrne commission art that is produced today cheapens, enhances, or has no impact at all on the value of his older stuff?

 

Edited by AtlasFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on a job interview for a job with Sotheby's Contemporary Art Department or MOMA and espouse negativity towards Lichtenstein and see how long the interview lasts.

Even better is go in there and talk about your love for Thomas Kinkade.

 

I had an interview with Sotherby's in the late 80s for a computer job. I did mention that I collected comics - we did have a brief chat about it, and I dont think it hurt my chances!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on a job interview for a job with Sotheby's Contemporary Art Department or MOMA and espouse negativity towards Lichtenstein and see how long the interview lasts.

Even better is go in there and talk about your love for Thomas Kinkade.

 

I had an interview with Sotherby's in the late 80s for a computer job. I did mention that I collected comics - we did have a brief chat about it, and I dont think it hurt my chances!

 

 

 

Well you probably didn't say " I collect comics and :censored: that goat :censored: -er Lichten :censored: " The interview would take a whole different turn I would guess. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great points.

 

As an aside I would venture to guess there is a lot of 4. and 5. in fine art as well.

 

 

 

A TON in fine art.

 

Go on a job interview for a job with Sotheby's Contemporary Art Department or MOMA and espouse negativity towards Lichtenstein and see how long the interview lasts.

 

There's too much money to be made, and too much already invested in certain areas of fine art to EVER let the tenor switch from idol worship to anything else.

 

While there is an element of truth in what you say, Chris, I find it difficult to believe that it isn't even more pronounced in the comic OA world. At least in the fine art world, you have writers and critics and scholars who make a living of analyzing and critiquing art, which helps counterbalance the auction house and dealer hype. For example, I used to love reading Souren Melikian's great column in Art+Auction magazine where he routinely calls out overrated and overpriced paintings (as well as underrated and underpriced paintings) Where is the corresponding countervailing influence in OA? Is there any forum where both connoisseurship and market values can be objectively discussed without being self-censored to the point of irrelevance? At best, collectors talk behind the scenes and off the record (just as they do in the fine art world), but the level of public critical discourse in the OA world is somewhere between minimal and non-existent.

 

I'm also really not seeing how "idol worship" of Warhol, Lichtenstein, Johns, Pollock, Rothko, Rauschenberg, Basquiat, etc. differs from idol worship of Kirby, Romita, Ditko, Adams, Miller, Byrne, Frazetta, BWS, Wrightson, etc. Go for a job interview at Heritage's Comic Art Department or MoCCA and espouse negativity towards Kirby and Frazetta and see how long the interview lasts. :baiting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on a job interview for a job with Sotheby's Contemporary Art Department or MOMA and espouse negativity towards Lichtenstein and see how long the interview lasts.

Even better is go in there and talk about your love for Thomas Kinkade.

 

I had an interview with Sotherby's in the late 80s for a computer job. I did mention that I collected comics - we did have a brief chat about it, and I dont think it hurt my chances!

 

 

 

Well you probably didn't say " I collect comics and :censored: that goat :censored: -er Lichten :censored: " The interview would take a whole different turn I would guess. lol

 

 

I didnt know anything about Roy at the time, so he never came up. But I do remember mentioning Barry Smith as an artist I liked - jeeze maybe that's what did me in!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go for a job interview at Heritage's Comic Art Department or MoCCA and espouse negativity towards Kirby and Frazetta and see how long the interview lasts. :baiting:

 

 

Wouldn't that be more an example of being ill-informed and of a low IQ? lol

 

I think they'd be more upset if someone equated Kirby's contributions or Frazetta's in general to someone who's most well remembered for aping someone else work.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris, will you be leading the protests against this?

 

Roy Lichtenstein Retrospective at The Art Institute of Chicago Opens May 16

 

At the very least, I expect a strongly worded letter to the Director of the AIC and to the editor of the Tribune. :baiting:

 

 

I plan on sneaking in, undercover.

 

I am knitting my own turtleneck and scanning the pawn shops for a sweet pair of faux hipster shades. lol

 

I do know there were interviews with several people,on video, who were in town about the retrospective. They were to be run on monitors in and around the retrospective. Several of them were less than complimentary. I wonder if any of the critical discussions will be shown to the public.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The prices just get nuttier and nuttier, but the artwork is beautiful. In spite of its overt comic book style, it still manages to be a moving and poignant stolen moment of a sleeping girl, as much as any photograph or Old Master rendering of the same subject, without the use of any words or backstory as in the original printed comic book. I don't know what kind of value-neutral world some of you guys live in, but to think that the original panel in a comic book speaks to the reader/viewer in remotely the same way, or is somehow equal to or even superior because it was the source material for Lichtenstein's work, is just :screwy:

 

That said, the mood of the market (not just in contemporary art, but across many art/collectibles categories) feels disturbingly like late 2007-early 2008 to me, with people paying up with abandon despite the fact that the global economy is clearly showing signs of rolling over (with Europe sliding into a Depression with a capital D). I would not be at all surprised to see another hiccup in the art market in late 2012 or early 2013, much as we saw in late 2008 and 2009 (and, aside from the best of the best, most art/collectibles are still below their peak prices achieved in 2006-2008). I would not be at all surprised to see people point (in hindsight) to the $120 million sale of The Scream as an inflection/turning point in the art market, much as Damien Hirst's Beautiful Inside My Head Forever sale in September 2008 marked the top of the overall contemporary art market to date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another Lichetenstein piece just sold for $45 Million

 

http://news.yahoo.com/lichtensteins-sleeping-girl-sells-record-45-million-023001600.html

 

 

 

Absolutely insane. What a piece of turd!

 

Fact is often stranger than fiction:

 

capt_sge_ivd65_300806212449_photo00_photo_default-512x368.jpg

 

Daniel Edwards, the man who also created the controversial 'Moment to Pro-Life: The Birth of Sean Preston', the statuette of the Britney Spears giving birth on a bearskin, has come up with another idea for a grand piece of art.

 

'Suri Cruise's Baby Poop Bronzed for Charity', is a bronze statuette of the famous baby's allegedly first poop and, as anyone can easily see, the plaque even bears the date of its creation, August 18. For all those interested, the exhibit can be seen on display at Brooklyn Capla Kesting Fine Art Gallery.

 

The bronze sculpture is meant to be a social critique and comment on the culture of celebrity and of the attention that people paid to the baby of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. 'It's partially a statement on modern media that "celebrity poop" has more entertainment value than health, famine or other critical issues facing society and governments today', a spokesperson for the gallery said yesterday at the big 'unveiling'.

 

'Also, it is a statement on the absurdity of the media coverage surrounding Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes' new baby, Suri Cruise, which has reached stellar proportions and is eclipsing far more notable events with more substance', he added about the art work that already attracted thousands of curious fans.

 

The gallery, the same one that displayed the Britney-giving-birth statuette, will keep the bronzed poop until September, when the art work is to go on sale on eBay.

 

In this case, I'd definitely agree that the artist's work is superior to the source material as, for no other reason, it's a lot easier on the nose . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In spite of its overt comic book style, it still manages to be a moving and poignant stolen moment of a sleeping girl, as much as any photograph or Old Master rendering of the same subject, without the use of any words or backstory as in the original printed comic book.

 

I respect your opinions but you sound like you've drunk a little too much of the fine art Kool-Aid on this one! I understand that I am looking at a small jpg but find it to be neither beautiful nor moving nor poignant.

 

I think that sometimes in art (whether fine or comic, neither has a monopoly on this) a sort of reverse logic is used to substantiate the worth of something that is priced at high levels. "Well of course its beautiful, do you know how much its worth?"

 

And that sounds to me like its the case here. I understand his place in history and all that and if someone wants to buy it for $45 m because they feel he was an important creator, great. But let's call a spade a spade and a turd a turd. An important turd is still a turd.

 

But, maybe that's my value-neutrality talking :baiting:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2