User Tag List

Results 1 to 4 of 4

  1. #1

    Default The Value of Art

    With the remains of what is believed to be stolen paintings from renowned artists burned in a stove, we are reminded that a treasured piece of history has been lost, valued at millions of dollars.

    As someone who has not studied art and views the value of art as primarily subjective, I am curious what makes these paintings so valuable other than the fact that they were painted by people who are regarded as GREAT painters. I look at some of these works, and I see nothing special. Perhaps, some art aficionados in the forum can enlighten me.

    When I compare the paintings below from these famed artists to paintings from Adolf Hitler, I view his as far more pleasing to the eyes from an aesthetic perspective. Without taking his crimes against humanity into consideration, and simply judging his artwork on merit alone, why was he rejected from art school and Picasso hailed as a genius in his profession? I feel like people only value these "great artists" because they were told these artists are great...and that's it. What makes them better than your average art student who gets no recognition?

    Picasso (seriously, this looks like it was painted by an adolescent)

    Picasso (Wtf? Is this a finger painting?)

    Monet (This is...okay, but honestly Bob Ross is way fucking better.)




    Bob fuckin' Ross

    Bob Ross

    Last edited by Epiphany; 07-23-2013 at 03:58 AM.

  2. #2
    Member CheshireCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013


    Hm. I'd say the meaning of art is subjective. But the value of a painting by a historical person is an artifact. Artifacts are the heirlooms of our ancestors. They are coveted as if they had some magical power to thrust us into a different world.

    This is straying off topic a little...
    After reading what Picasso had to say about his own art, it is apparent that he catered his style to satisfy what the public fancied. That is to say, the oddities of his work reflects society at large.

    "From the moment that art ceases to be food that feeds the best minds, the artist can use his talents to perform all the tricks of the intellectual charlatan. Most people can today no longer expect to receive consolation and exaltation from art. The 'refined,' the rich, the professional 'do-nothings', the distillers of quintessence desire only the peculiar, the sensational, the eccentric, the scandalous in today's art.

    I myself, since the advent of Cubism, have fed these fellows what they wanted and satisfied these critics with all the ridiculous ideas that have passed through my mind. The less they understood them, the more they admired me. Through amusing myself with all these absurd farces, I became celebrated, and very rapidly. For a painter, celebrity means sales and consequent affluence. Today, as you know, I am celebrated, I am rich.

    But when I am alone, I do not have the effrontery to consider myself an artist at all, not in the grand old meaning of the word: Giotto, Titian, Rembrandt, Goya were great painters. I am only a public clown - a mountebank. I have understood my time and have exploited the imbecility, the vanity, the greed of my contemporaries. It is a bitter confession, this confession of mine, more painful than it may seem. But at least and at last it does have the merit of being honest."

    Pablo Picasso, 1952
    "The unconscious mind should be called the super-conconsious mind."

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    ENFp None



    Oh, that's interesting. I had no idea.


    Asking why they're valuable is like asking why gold is valuable. A bunch of people value it, so it's just accepted as such.

  4. #4
    Senior Member TSDesigner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009


    There IS a network of people who get to decide which artists are "important." Then they tell people that this artist is important, which raises the price of his "art." The price of art depends on the fame of the artist. They can artificially make any artist famous by promoting him in museums, news media, etc. It's just a total scam. It's totally bullshit. I think it's just a bunch of powerful & influential swindlers who do this to make a lot of money selling crap. You can like whatever art you like and you don't have to listen to this corrupt & criminal establishment. If you think Picasso sucks then he sucks. Period. Personally I do think Picasso sucks.

Similar Threads

  1. The value of cynicism
    By Quinlan in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-12-2009, 04:21 PM
  2. Mom and I argue about the value of Football
    By Athenian200 in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-08-2009, 01:45 PM
  3. The Importance of Art
    By placebo in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 09-30-2008, 09:42 PM
  4. The value of random on-line personality tests
    By Ilah in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-26-2008, 08:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO