The short answer is that, you may not understand it, but people with real money do. Do you not like/appreciate the art or is it just the price that you find egregious? I'll be the first to agree that $140 million for almost anything is nutty, but the art itself is beyond reproach. It's mesmerizing, innovative, iconic and historically significant in a way that the 1st appearance of Wolverine could never be - centuries of painting technique and composition turned on its head.
As for the price, when you have billionaires competing for so little of the great stuff, sometimes you need to get to $140 million to achieve price discrimination. Like I said, I think paying that much for a painting is pretty nuts. But it would be less nuts to me than seeing that Hulk #180 page sell for 7-figures.
Both. I've never understood "art" that simply looks like someone threw some paint at a canvas. I mean, I could create something like that but I couldn't draw Wolverine You say it's mesmerizing, innovative, and iconic. I say any old hack could do the same thing!
The fact that "people with real money" understand the art makes the whole thing even more laughable to me. And that's not meant as a jab at you; I've heard that argument before. I don't have a ton of money myself so I think it's silly to spend 10s of thousands on a comicbook. Now if I had money to burn I'm sure I'd feel different. However, I don't care how much money I had, I wouldn't spend a dime on some of the art that's sold for millions.
72.8 million - Really?
Looks like an ice cream sandwich. Anyhow, the money thing aside, I just don't get the appeal of Pollock's work. If it had no real monetary value, and was just a painting on a wall, I'd have that monstrosity removed from my house. I respect all peoples opinions, but it's just my opinion that my 5 year old son with a couple of buckets of paint and a brush could make the same thing.