I'd be super excited to have Mr. Huntington define good art for us.

My favorite definition of art is:

art is why I get up in the morning
but my definition ends there

While I find judging the value of art(both artistically and monetarily) to be quite GAUCHE, I can't understand the draw of the Koons guy.



This sold for 54 MILLY.

Of course it did! That's an original Pablo Dali in the background.

Buyer's agreed to pay. The installation's already believed to be worth more, due to publicity (publicity being the medium in which 'artists' like Banksy and for that matter Damien Hirst and Tracey Emin actually work, than which nothing could be more cynically modern and on-point, I suppose), and idiots have been queuing to see it. Here, the BBC's Will Gompertz talks to queuers wearing a hooded anorak and distorting his voice on mike to be like Banksy, but they don't necessarily fall for it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/entert...s-do-it-better

Have there been any estimates of the new value of the shredded piece?

I'll take over 10.

I’d be certain banksy was in the room when it happened too! That’s what makes it even better 😂

He meant to shred the whole thing https://www.theguardian.com/artandde...entire-artwork

CALLED IT!

Hot take: I actually don't think he meant to shred the whole thing. The place it stopped is way too convenient. Plus the effect is way greater this way.

Banksy always keeps the world guessing

That take is pretty hot considering gregorio's post just 2 posts above your's links to a video posted by Banksy that pretty explicitly shows he meant to shred the whole thing.

Not nearly as bad as My lonesome cowboy(nsfw, naked guy with a cum lasso) that sold for 15million

Wtf, that sounds awesome.

How much difference does it actually make if the thing is totally shredded compared to halfway?

I guess now the buyer is going to preserve it in a way that keeps the half shredded look while a full shredded picture most likely would have been put back together? But would that really change the value of the piece or the media attention the stunt received?

Definitely makes huge difference. Consider the display-ability, and how your 2 scenarios display entirely different. The partially shredded piece tells the story better.

this

If you could see the 2 scenarios side by side, then the half-shredded tells the story better and is worth more.

But in the world where only the full shredded occurs, then no one ever thinks of a half-shred situation, and the story is the story. Buyer displays the shredded pieces in the original frame, and it's worth ~the same in that world as the half-shred is in this world.

In a world where only a Chevy exists and a Mercedes does not, a Chevy doesn't have the same value as a Mercedes simply because a Mercedes doesn't exist.

Terrible analogy is terrible.

That’s pretty much what I was thinking.
In a world where either Chevy or Mercedes are the only cars available and are mostly sold to people with a net worth >$100mil, I don’t see a reason why they would sell for a different price. If I was a billionaire and it was between a Chevy Spark or walking, I would certainly pay S-class money for that car.

patron,

I'm sorry you and madlex didn't understand the analogy. I'll explain it below for both of you.

madlex,

That's not how it works (which was the entire point of the analogy). The Chevy's value is based on it's cost to produce and it's utility. While a Mercedes is nothing but a much better version of your Spark it doesn't mean that absent Mercedes existence that people are going to start paying way above the market value for a Spark or that the only other option is to walk.

It should be fairly easy to understand why a piece of art which can still be displayed as a painting on the wall, along with it's now having possible multiple interpretations, is more valuable than a piece of art that was completely destroyed by the artist. The destroyed piece can't easily be displayed and if it were reassembled to hand on the wall it wouldn't be created by the artist. Not to mention the additional cost to restore the piece.

The 2 things are not equal and wouldn't be equal even if one didn't exist.

i think art is mostly lol but this publicity stunt was cool enough it stuck in my head the next day. its gotta be a setup but still neat.

its

de captain,

I'm sorry you didn't understand why your terrible analogy is terrible. I'll explain it below for you.

Cars are not analogous to art. Their values are based on extremely different things, and you are misidentifying what makes the Banksy shredded art valuable. You state that a Chevy's value is based on its cost to produce and its utility, but that is not the case for art, which renders your comparison meaningless.

It should be fairly easy to understand why, for a piece of art that was made much more valuable due to what occurred, the additional value comes from its story and not the exact state of its shreddedness. Which is why other Girl with Balloon prints do not go up in value when you half-shred them.