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

[AKA Rick]

I think art is so subjective, so it truly is what is one man or woman's "trash" is another one's "treasure"

 

That's my stance from an art appreciation, enjoyment and aesthetic perspective. So, I can't really name-call art fans on what they like and wha they don't like.

 

However, from the perspective of any of these pieces mentioned being hailed, critiqued and praised, it does sometimes seem odd when a "remix" so to speak of one person's original creation is reinterpreted with minor modifications and that new creation is somehow called "genius" and seen as uniquely original without much respect in a footnote reference to the original creation. At least even in the small pop culture world of comic books, most artists cite their inspiration with the notatin "after... (original artists name)" when lifting a layout or reimagining a previously drawn scene.

 

Also as far as the pricing and valuation, it does baffle me that some of the modern artists passing their "masterpieces" through the community can command the prices that they do. I guess in this free economy of supply/demand, more power to the marketers and let the buyer beware, so I can't fault them for accepting money people are gladly paying them.

 

[delekkerste]

Very intersting link. Gene, is there an end game for a contemporary art "investor" other than find a greater fool? Are there many documented cases of guys getting tax benefits by donating to museums, or selling their art to the company on whose board they sit? I am not talking about things like insurance fraud, but legal ways to liquidate this (sorry if this question offends anyone).

 

I think the end game for most investors in art & collectibles (and any other non-income generating assets) is reselling at a higher price. At the high end of fine art (and perhaps some collectibles), donations to museums can be used to help offset income or estate taxes, but this is all heavily scrutinized and no one is able to game the system and come out ahead versus selling the art for personal gain. Far from being insidious, the art donations are pretty noble if you think about it - I don't know any comic book or OA collectors who would give their collections away and realize less than 50% of the value of their collections through tax savings.

 

In any case, I think most contemporary art is bought not for investment or with resale in mind, but rather because (1) it's used as decor, (2) the purchaser likes the art and/or (3) the purchaser wants to show off his wealth/status/taste.

[Sardo Numspar]

I'd rather have a Hembeck

[delekkerste]

This new series of Sotheby's videos on Roy Lichtenstein may make some of your heads explode:

 

Sotheby's Conversations on Roy Lichtenstein's "Sleeping Girl"

 

I enjoyed watching them.

[Mio]

This new series of Sotheby's videos on Roy Lichtenstein may make some of your heads explode:

 

Sotheby's Conversations on Roy Lichtenstein's "Sleeping Girl"

 

I enjoyed watching them.

 

Ugh. No kidding. I wanted to strangle those commentators.

[comix4fun]

This new series of Sotheby's videos on Roy Lichtenstein may make some of your heads explode:

 

Sotheby's Conversations on Roy Lichtenstein's "Sleeping Girl"

 

I enjoyed watching them.

 

 

 

It's like a bunch of us sitting around discussion Bolland Dredd covers.

 

Hardly objective with heavy dose of self-interest, and a sprinkling of tunnel vision.

 

I love the audible gasps from the interviewer in the the Irving Blum video. Classic.

[Terry Doyle]

In the first video, you catch a brief glimpse of a painting of a sock.

 

That had me rolling around with laughter!

[delekkerste]

It's like a bunch of us sitting around discussion Bolland Dredd covers.

 

I'd love to see that, actually. Maybe we can film it at the NY Con this fall.

[comix4fun]

It's like a bunch of us sitting around discussion Bolland Dredd covers.

 

I'd love to see that, actually. Maybe we can film it at the NY Con this fall.

 

 

I just ordered a new beret, perfected my Thurston Howell III accent, and I am working on my affected lisp...I should be good to go by then.

[delekkerste]

I just ordered a new beret, perfected my Thurston Howell III accent, and I am working on my affected lisp...I should be good to go by then.

 

 

In all seriousness, though, I'd love to see more connoisseurship in the OA hobby. I love what the "What If Kirby" website is doing, and enjoy reading Ron Sonenthal's epic write-ups when he posts a piece in his CAF gallery (even if I don't always agree with all of his points). I wish there was a forum where we could have intelligent debates about the art itself, because most of what passes for public discourse in the hobby is closer to cheerleading than anything else. I know most people, including myself, are somewhat reluctant to say anything that might even remotely be construed as critical/negative, for fear of ostracism and reprisal. While I think there is some benefit to that, I think it has also completely stymied the development of critical analysis in the OA world, which is a shame.

[dem1138]

I just ordered a new beret, perfected my Thurston Howell III accent, and I am working on my affected lisp...I should be good to go by then.

 

 

In all seriousness, though, I'd love to see more connoisseurship in the OA hobby. I love what the "What If Kirby" website is doing, and enjoy reading Ron Sonenthal's epic write-ups when he posts a piece in his CAF gallery (even if I don't always agree with all of his points). I wish there was a forum where we could have intelligent debates about the art itself, because most of what passes for public discourse in the hobby is closer to cheerleading than anything else. I know most people, including myself, are somewhat reluctant to say anything publicly that might even remotely be construed as critical/negative, for fear of ostracism and reprisal. While I think there is some benefit to that, I think it has also completely stymied the development of critical analysis in the OA world, which is a shame.

 

fixed that for you...and yes, I wish some of our private discourse could be had on a forum instead

[CollectingFool]

I wish there was a forum where we could have intelligent debates about the art itself, because most of what passes for public discourse in the hobby is closer to cheerleading than anything else. I know most people, including myself, are somewhat reluctant to say anything that might even remotely be construed as critical/negative, for fear of ostracism and reprisal. While I think there is some benefit to that, I think it has also completely stymied the development of critical analysis in the OA world, which is a shame.

 

OK, if you want to get into it, here are the reasons why I feel it isn't possible to have these types of discussions for a prolonged period of time:

 

1. To have an intelligent discussion with a group of people would require an intelligent group. While many of the people in the hobby are more than capable of having an intelligent discussion you have the handful that jump in with their attacks and one-liners that completely miss the point and that usually winds up derailing the discussion.

 

2. There is too much emotion in the hobby. The main reason most people get into the hobby to begin with is because the artwork resonates with them. It's not easy to objectively listen to someone's point when emotionally you feel they are attacking something you love.

 

3. For the most part, this stuff isn't art. The quality of the line work and composition is compromised by rushed deadlines, heavy handed editors and the need to sell the story. Looked at as objects of art, most comic art is mediocre at best.

 

4. Lots of idol worship in this hobby for artists would prevent an honest discussion of certain art. Even worse, lots of idol worship of collectors/dealers just because they have the ability to spend money. Many collectors seem to assume these people have taste just because of how much they were willing to spend and won't voice a contrary opinion.

 

5. Too many followers. A lot of the collectors I know don't "buy what they like", they buy what they perceive is what they should like, adding items to their "checklist" of desired art based on what they see others put in their collections (and the praise those pieces get from other collectors). How can these collectors participate in the types of analytical critical discussions you're describing when they really don't even know why they supposedly like the art they're buying.

 

After many years of seeing these types of discussions begin, get derailed and degrade into name calling and people choosing sides I don't hold out much hope. There was a time back when comicart-l was relatively young that great discussions could go on for a while. Members like Jeff Jones could always be counted on to chime in with a real critique or anecdote. Discussions would get heated but it would still be civil. Of course the group was only about 100 people or so. Don't think we'll be seeing anything like that again.

 

 

 

[Nexus]

I wish there was a forum where we could have intelligent debates about the art itself, because most of what passes for public discourse in the hobby is closer to cheerleading than anything else. I know most people, including myself, are somewhat reluctant to say anything that might even remotely be construed as critical/negative, for fear of ostracism and reprisal. While I think there is some benefit to that, I think it has also completely stymied the development of critical analysis in the OA world, which is a shame.

 

OK, if you want to get into it, here are the reasons why I feel it isn't possible to have these types of discussions for a prolonged period of time:

 

1. To have an intelligent discussion with a group of people would require an intelligent group. While many of the people in the hobby are more than capable of having an intelligent discussion you have the handful that jump in with their attacks and one-liners that completely miss the point and that usually winds up derailing the discussion.

 

2. There is too much emotion in the hobby. The main reason most people get into the hobby to begin with is because the artwork resonates with them. It's not easy to objectively listen to someone's point when emotionally you feel they are attacking something you love.

 

3. For the most part, this stuff isn't art. The quality of the line work and composition is compromised by rushed deadlines, heavy handed editors and the need to sell the story. Looked at as objects of art, most comic art is mediocre at best.

 

4. Lots of idol worship in this hobby for artists would prevent an honest discussion of certain art. Even worse, lots of idol worship of collectors/dealers just because they have the ability to spend money. Many collectors seem to assume these people have taste just because of how much they were willing to spend and won't voice a contrary opinion.

 

5. Too many followers. A lot of the collectors I know don't "buy what they like", they buy what they perceive is what they should like, adding items to their "checklist" of desired art based on what they see others put in their collections (and the praise those pieces get from other collectors). How can these collectors participate in the types of analytical critical discussions you're describing when they really don't even know why they supposedly like the art they're buying.

 

After many years of seeing these types of discussions begin, get derailed and degrade into name calling and people choosing sides I don't hold out much hope. There was a time back when comicart-l was relatively young that great discussions could go on for a while. Members like Jeff Jones could always be counted on to chime in with a real critique or anecdote. Discussions would get heated but it would still be civil. Of course the group was only about 100 people or so. Don't think we'll be seeing anything like that again.

 

 

 

Killjoy!

 

Of course, you're right. Mostly. We can all throw in our two cents on art that none of us own. But if one of us owns it? Harder to do that.

[Bronty]

Great points.

 

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

[AtlasFan]

I wish there was a forum where we could have intelligent debates about the art itself, because most of what passes for public discourse in the hobby is closer to cheerleading than anything else. I know most people, including myself, are somewhat reluctant to say anything that might even remotely be construed as critical/negative, for fear of ostracism and reprisal. While I think there is some benefit to that, I think it has also completely stymied the development of critical analysis in the OA world, which is a shame.

 

OK, if you want to get into it, here are the reasons why I feel it isn't possible to have these types of discussions for a prolonged period of time:

 

1. To have an intelligent discussion with a group of people would require an intelligent group. While many of the people in the hobby are more than capable of having an intelligent discussion you have the handful that jump in with their attacks and one-liners that completely miss the point and that usually winds up derailing the discussion.

 

2. There is too much emotion in the hobby. The main reason most people get into the hobby to begin with is because the artwork resonates with them. It's not easy to objectively listen to someone's point when emotionally you feel they are attacking something you love.

 

3. For the most part, this stuff isn't art. The quality of the line work and composition is compromised by rushed deadlines, heavy handed editors and the need to sell the story. Looked at as objects of art, most comic art is mediocre at best.

 

4. Lots of idol worship in this hobby for artists would prevent an honest discussion of certain art. Even worse, lots of idol worship of collectors/dealers just because they have the ability to spend money. Many collectors seem to assume these people have taste just because of how much they were willing to spend and won't voice a contrary opinion.

 

5. Too many followers. A lot of the collectors I know don't "buy what they like", they buy what they perceive is what they should like, adding items to their "checklist" of desired art based on what they see others put in their collections (and the praise those pieces get from other collectors). How can these collectors participate in the types of analytical critical discussions you're describing when they really don't even know why they supposedly like the art they're buying.

 

After many years of seeing these types of discussions begin, get derailed and degrade into name calling and people choosing sides I don't hold out much hope. There was a time back when comicart-l was relatively young that great discussions could go on for a while. Members like Jeff Jones could always be counted on to chime in with a real critique or anecdote. Discussions would get heated but it would still be civil. Of course the group was only about 100 people or so. Don't think we'll be seeing anything like that again.

 

 

 

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.

 

[Bronty]

well one could argue its illustration not "art" and that's the vein I took Gene's comments in, I don't think he's hating on the stuff or he wouldn't buy it himself.

 

The old point about deadlines and so on though I've never agreed with - to me the deadlines are what make it what it is, sometimes for the bad, but also sometimes very much for the good.

 

Kirby would have been a much lesser artist if he hadn't created such a huge volume of work. Practice made perfect, even with his unlikely style.

 

[CollectingFool]

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.

 

 

 

 

 

[AtlasFan]

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.

 

 

 

 

Art is very subjective...same could be said of politics, religion and just about anything else!

[comix4fun]

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.

[Pete Marino]

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.

 

 

Sounds like a great idea for a podcast......