Banana taped to wall sells for $120,000.

[Dieter the Brock]

No, I’m reiterating your point. It isn’t about the banana, the tape, or the wall. It isn’t even about a message. It’s the art world doing their thing. And if there is a message maybe he puts the crap on a plate and is saying Eat shit! It wouldn’t be far off the middle finger sculpture.

But I guess I don’t relate to the sorts that find such things fun. So if that’s what you mean by I don’t get it then you were right. The modern art scene, the galleries, the shows, the in depth discussions about bananas on the wall, the dressing up in artsy getups, etc,.. It’s never appealed to me.

Yeah I guess. I’m sorry for implying you don’t get something - wasn’t trying to be personal. Looks like I offended you somewhere along the line. But yeah, dressing up in artsy clothes is what I’m all about. Currently trying to bring back hammer pants.

 

[coconut]

Well first, he didn’t crap on cardboard, nor was there shellac involved. But if you are trying to equivocate a banana and duct tape with human feces I am not gonna vibe with that.

Well why not? With or without a proper back story and a gallery willing to accept it why not? What I gather from your posts is that there isn't any standard for art. At least his crap can be verified by DNA thus technically unique to that "artist".

 

[Dieter the Brock]

Well why not? With or without a proper back story and a gallery willing to accept it why not? What I gather from your posts is that there isn't any standard for art. At least his crap can be verified by DNA thus technically unique to that "artist".

Right on!
Your gathering of my posts is spot on
Totally yes, smeared shit, yes that is right. You got it, bro
You are 100% totally correct
Totally that is totally what I am saying - yes you nailed it on the head
To think I could share my professional experience in the art world with my fellow Ram brothers was a totally stupid thing to do. You have totally corrected me and put me in my place,
Yeah! shit, art, crap, dna - i mean that's it! You nailed it bro
Go for it!
Slam dunk it bruh

 

[coconut]

Right on!
Your gathering of my posts is spot on
Totally yes, smeared shit, yes that is right. You got it, bro
You are 100% totally correct
Totally that is totally what I am saying - yes you nailed it on the head
To think I could share my professional experience in the art world with my fellow Ram brothers was a totally stupid thing to do. You have totally corrected me and put me in my place,
Yeah! shit, art, crap, dna - i mean that's it! You nailed it bro
Go for it!
Slam dunk it bruh

You're welcome.

 

[Farr Be It]

Would it be unwise, inspired by this thread, to post a thread titled “Show Us Your Bananas!”
where all of us ROD guys and gals post OUR OWN art work with only the following rules:

1. Must be a banana
2. Must use duct tape
3. Must be applied to a wall.
   Beyond that fellas the sky is the limit

 

[coconut]

Would it be unwise, inspired by this thread, to post a thread titled “Show Us Your Bananas!”
where all of us ROD guys and gals post OUR OWN art work with only the following rules:

1. Must be a banana
2. Must use duct tape
3. Must be applied to a wall.
   Beyond that fellas the sky is the limit

Yeah and we can have a gallery showcase our enlightened interpretations of walls, duct tape and bananas. Forget galleries in NY, London, Miami, Paris and anywhere else except this place-

 

[Dodgersrf]

Right on!
Your gathering of my posts is spot on
Totally yes, smeared shit, yes that is right. You got it, bro
You are 100% totally correct
Totally that is totally what I am saying - yes you nailed it on the head
To think I could share my professional experience in the art world with my fellow Ram brothers was a totally stupid thing to do. You have totally corrected me and put me in my place,
Yeah! shit, art, crap, dna - i mean that's it! You nailed it bro
Go for it!
Slam dunk it bruh

I actually enjoyed your point of view on the subject.

I still would consider it more of a souvenir from the artist than an artifact, but I'm by no means an expert on the subject.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

I actually enjoyed your point of view on the subject.

I still would consider it more of a souvenir from the artest than an artifact, but I'm bu no means an expert on the subject.

Thanks, man -- and I am in no means an expert, but I deal with famous artists all the time, in a totally unseen and in a positive and stealthy way.

I think the dude's banana duct tape sculpture is an interesting piece and although it is not my favorite I really do appreciate what he did. I think the absurdity is on the lines with other projects like the golden urinal, this is not a pipe, but better than the self-promoting bull crap from a Banksy mentioned above and in the NYTImes article.

From my experience, most artists are geniuses. Then some are total douchebags like Julian Schabel. He still owes me 10$ for a pack of smokes - in NYC cigarettes are priced through the roof, dude claimed poverty and bummed the money to buy pack then never paid me back. That dude owns an entire block in the most prestigious part of Manhattan. That muther fucker. His work suffers in my eyes for the sheer amount of douche he lays on. I think he is into huge paintings to compensate for his issues, and it just comes off as overbearing and crass.

But then there are guys like Ed Ruscha who is the coolest dude in the world and his work is genius so you start to appreciate them as humans and what they bring to the table artistically. And guys like George Herms, he is about the greatest human of all time, really gentle and extremely thoughtful soul. So you get to know what their art is about in a lot of ways. Right now we are trying to get Damien Hurst to back one of our projects, which would be really good for me and my business partner. I mean the list of great artists who are great people keeps growing the more I meet these guys. So when it comes to a guy like Cattelan, to me the guy seems like a cool dude who is totally legit and backs his work. It's fun and playful. I don't have an issue with it, and it was actually a good price considering the amount of pub it is getting around the world.

As an artist I am stoked to be in the circles I am in. It is humbling and cause I am not in competition with anyone it is great fun. Here is me working in front of a Damien Hurst painting that was done for a friend. I like this photo and used it for my social network page which I never visit, but look at what it is. It is just paint splattered on a rotating wheel. Now is that something a child can do? Yeah I guess with some help. But when you get into contemporary art it is something completely different than painting portraits or pastoral scenes, so you kinda have to know how the history of photographs, and the rebuilding of Paris really changed the art scene from what it was (mona lisa portaits) to what you see today (bananas and duct tape)

 

[Dodgersrf]

Thanks, man -- and I am in no means an expert, but I deal with famous artists all the time, in a totally unseen and in a positive and stealthy way.

I think the dude's banana duct tape sculpture is an interesting piece and although it is not my favorite I really do appreciate what he did. I think the absurdity is on the lines with other projects like the golden urinal, this is not a pipe, but better than the self-promoting bull crap from a Banksy mentioned above and in the NYTImes article.

From my experience, most artists are geniuses. Then some are total douchebags like Julian Schabel. He still owes me 10$ for a pack of smokes - in NYC cigarettes are priced through the roof, dude claimed poverty and bummed the money to buy pack then never paid me back. That dude owns an entire block in the most prestigious part of Manhattan. That muther fucker. His work suffers in my eyes for the sheer amount of douche he lays on. I think he is into huge paintings to compensate for his issues, and it just comes off as overbearing and crass.

But then there are guys like Ed Ruscha who is the coolest dude in the world and his work is genius so you start to appreciate them as humans and what they bring to the table artistically. And guys like George Herms, he is about the greatest human of all time, really gentle and extremely thoughtful soul. So you get to know what their art is about in a lot of ways. Right now we are trying to get Damien Hurst to back one of our projects, which would be really good for me and my business partner. I mean the list of great artists who are great people keeps growing the more I meet these guys. So when it comes to a guy like Cattelan, to me the guy seems like a cool dude who is totally legit and backs his work. It's fun and playful. I don't have an issue with it, and it was actually a good price considering the amount of pub it is getting around the world.

As an artist I am stoked to be in the circles I am in. It is humbling and cause I am not in competition with anyone it is great fun. Here is me working in front of a Damien Hurst painting that was done for a friend. I like this photo and used it for my social network page which I never visit, but look at what it is. It is just paint splattered on a rotating wheel. Now is that something a child can do? Yeah I guess with some help. But when you get into contemporary art it is something completely different than painting portraits or pastoral scenes, so you kinda have to know how the history of photographs, and the rebuilding of Paris really changed the art scene from what it was (mona lisa portaits) to what you see today (bananas and duct tape)

View attachment 32870

Its eye opening to find out that there are many artists that are actually humble and grounded.

From the outside, it appeared to me, to be a very pretentious community.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

Its eye opening to find out that there are many artists that are actually humble and grounded.

From the outside, it appeared to me, to be a very pretentious community.

There is an element of that for sure.
But from my experience mostly from people that aren’t “artists” - gallery owners, collectors, etc, might bring more of that to the table. Schnabel is the epitome of suck and ostentatiousness. I can’t hammer on this guys enough. The pink thing is his place. It’s huge. I only got as far as the 4th floor before I wanted to get out. So yeah that shit does exist. When money comes into the scene I think some people’s egos get the better of them.

You need to watch this interview with Schnabel on 60 Minutes. What was meant to be a prestige piece turned into Morley Safer destroying him - i mean how does one piss of Morely Safer? Wait tell you see how Morely roasts him with his wife. Anyway, this made me happy.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4sajnloTFvU

 

[1maGoh]

Thanks, man -- and I am in no means an expert, but I deal with famous artists all the time, in a totally unseen and in a positive and stealthy way.

I think the dude's banana duct tape sculpture is an interesting piece and although it is not my favorite I really do appreciate what he did. I think the absurdity is on the lines with other projects like the golden urinal, this is not a pipe, but better than the self-promoting bull crap from a Banksy mentioned above and in the NYTImes article.

From my experience, most artists are geniuses. Then some are total douchebags like Julian Schabel. He still owes me 10$ for a pack of smokes - in NYC cigarettes are priced through the roof, dude claimed poverty and bummed the money to buy pack then never paid me back. That dude owns an entire block in the most prestigious part of Manhattan. That muther fucker. His work suffers in my eyes for the sheer amount of douche he lays on. I think he is into huge paintings to compensate for his issues, and it just comes off as overbearing and crass.

But then there are guys like Ed Ruscha who is the coolest dude in the world and his work is genius so you start to appreciate them as humans and what they bring to the table artistically. And guys like George Herms, he is about the greatest human of all time, really gentle and extremely thoughtful soul. So you get to know what their art is about in a lot of ways. Right now we are trying to get Damien Hurst to back one of our projects, which would be really good for me and my business partner. I mean the list of great artists who are great people keeps growing the more I meet these guys. So when it comes to a guy like Cattelan, to me the guy seems like a cool dude who is totally legit and backs his work. It's fun and playful. I don't have an issue with it, and it was actually a good price considering the amount of pub it is getting around the world.

As an artist I am stoked to be in the circles I am in. It is humbling and cause I am not in competition with anyone it is great fun. Here is me working in front of a Damien Hurst painting that was done for a friend. I like this photo and used it for my social network page which I never visit, but look at what it is. It is just paint splattered on a rotating wheel. Now is that something a child can do? Yeah I guess with some help. But when you get into contemporary art it is something completely different than painting portraits or pastoral scenes, so you kinda have to know how the history of photographs, and the rebuilding of Paris really changed the art scene from what it was (mona lisa portaits) to what you see today (bananas and duct tape)

View attachment 32870

Man, I don't want to get into it again but I totally don't understand looking at that and being impressed. Maybe a child can't do it alone, but as you said it's

just paint splattered on a rotating wheel.

I paid a little shop $10 to do something very similar on a frisbee. They probably did about a hundred very similar pieces per week. Now they weren't on big ass wheels like that, which is the hard to reproduce part. That gives it value. But it's not like it's really artistic and it didn't take tremendous talent. Given the tools, any adult with the use of one arm could make that. And it doesn't inspire any particular feeling. It might have a personal meaning to the artist, which would give it value in the eyes of some and make it more artistic to them, but it doesn't stand on its own.

And I don't say all that to trash the piece, the artist, or you. I'm just explaining my viewpoint on that as something that impressed another human being as art. I don't get it.

I guess I understand that the idea of aesthetically pleasing paintings, sculptures, etc that didn't look like anything and weren't trying to be anything was novel at one point. It was, at a point in time, a breakthrough idea. And that's cool. But I think what I fail to understand, and what the layman fails to understand (if I had to guess), is how they are superior or preferable to art that (for lack of a less offensive term) requires talent. If asked to choose between paint splatters on the sawed off roof of car from the 50's or an oil painting cliff side in a storm, I'm choosing the cliff side in the storm because it took talent to make it recognizable as what it is. That artist would have filled my brain into thinking that I could see an environment that did not exist. The other one destroyed an old car and dropped paint on it. It just doesn't make sense that someone would see the paint splatter and say "How meaningful and interesting. What was the artist trying to impart on us here? What does it say about society?" I personally feel that valuing at like that, and like the banana/duct tape is giving out participation awards. "You know what, Sport? It's just a banana on a wall, but you tried hard. Good job. You're so creative."

Again, just a meaningless difference of opinion and you have a lot of respect for these people so I don't want to disrespect you or them, but I look at that when and say, "oh. You did frisbee art, but really big. Cool I guess." But it wouldn't even occur to me too consider it art or to be impressed.

I apologize once again for my RBT (resting bitch text). My health Care plan doesn't consider RBT a "real illness", so I haven't been in therapy.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

Man, I don't want to get into it again but I totally don't understand looking at that and being impressed. Maybe a child can't do it alone, but as you said it's

I paid a little shop $10 to do something very similar on a frisbee. They probably did about a hundred very similar pieces per week. Now they weren't on big ass wheels like that, which is the hard to reproduce part. That gives it value. But it's not like it's really artistic and it didn't take tremendous talent. Given the tools, any adult with the use of one arm could make that. And it doesn't inspire any particular feeling. It might have a personal meaning to the artist, which would give it value in the eyes of some and make it more artistic to them, but it doesn't stand on its own.

And I don't say all that to trash the piece, the artist, or you. I'm just explaining my viewpoint on that as something that impressed another human being as art. I don't get it.

I guess I understand that the idea of aesthetically pleasing paintings, sculptures, etc that didn't look like anything and weren't trying to be anything was novel at one point. It was, at a point in time, a breakthrough idea. And that's cool. But I think what I fail to understand, and what the layman fails to understand (if I had to guess), is how they are superior or preferable to art that (for lack of a less offensive term) requires talent. If asked to choose between paint splatters on the sawed off roof of car from the 50's or an oil painting cliff side in a storm, I'm choosing the cliff side in the storm because it took talent to make it recognizable as what it is. That artist would have filled my brain into thinking that I could see an environment that did not exist. The other one destroyed an old car and dropped paint on it. It just doesn't make sense that someone would see the paint splatter and say "How meaningful and interesting. What was the artist trying to impart on us here? What does it say about society?" I personally feel that valuing at like that, and like the banana/duct tape is giving out participation awards. "You know what, Sport? It's just a banana on a wall, but you tried hard. Good job. You're so creative."

Again, just a meaningless difference of opinion and you have a lot of respect for these people so I don't want to disrespect you or them, but I look at that when and say, "oh. You did frisbee art, but really big. Cool I guess." But it wouldn't even occur to me too consider it art or to be impressed.

I apologize once again for my RBT (resting bitch text). My health Care plan doesn't consider RBT a "real illness", so I haven't been in therapy.

What you’re saying is totally fair — again you don’t have to understand or vibe with any of these types of art paintings, sculptures, installations etc, for it to have meaning and value in the world.

About the frisbee - you might want to ask the owners of the shop who you paid $10 to where they got the idea. I am pretty sure it’ll trace back to Damien Hirst.

So you are the end user of Damien Hirst’s artwork. And you must dig the frisbee cause you paid $10. Multiply that times all the frisbee’a sold that that comes out to a sum. That sum and the sum total of cash made from those who replicate that idea far surpasses the cost of the painting I showed (which is a lot.)

I think the financial part of art is where you have an issue as oppose to the art itself. I think you need to place your frustration with the galleries and art brokers rather than the artist. The galleries control which artists are are successful and can manipulate prices. It is borderline criminal in a lot of ways.

You may find this passage from an decent article from Quartz in 2013:

The nature of art as a commodity inherently makes efficient prices, meaning prices that reflect all available information about value, impossible. Value is subjective; the intrinsic value of a painting is paint and canvas—beyond that value is often a matter of taste. This is why the industry has developed an intricate signaling process where the approval of a handful of galleries, collectors and museums, determines what is good and valuable. Dealers who own and work at art galleries invest many resources in building the artist’s brand. But artists often take years to mature and have uneven periods, so any perception that an artist is over-hyped or overpriced can be anathema to his career. Value in art can be arbitrary but brands are fragile.

I come from Art Center College of Design in Pasadena - it is a high end school that focuses on trades - for example all the top automotive designers in the world come from Art Center College of Design. So when you get in your BMW, or your VW the car was designed by a graduate from my alma mater. Stuff from the gear shift to the radio knobs to the entire look was designed by one of these guys. I was trained in commercial film. Dudes like Michael Bay who came from commercials come from my school. The point I am trying to make to you is only that you are having an issue with the world of Fine Art — but you are down with and have an easy time understanding the role an auto designer has when you see that badass 7-Series, or when you watch Armageddon on TNT. That’s cause other disciplines like graphic design, environmental design, automotive, photography, film, etc has a usefulness you identify with.

Fine Art for you is clearly more challenging for you to wrap your head around — i have tried my best to shed light on some of the aspects of it I understand. And I have tried to do some as humbly as possible.

Maybe check out some history. I keep referring to the Industrial Revolution and photography as being major players in the evolution of art from pastoral scenes and portraits to diamond covered skulls and gold toilets. It progresses from impressionism all the way to pop art. Anyway, maybe do a little research - you might find stuff that makes absolutely no sense, nor has any usefulness, but you may come across stuff you like and can appreciate beyond just a simple seascape .

 

[1maGoh]

What you’re saying is totally fair — again you don’t have to understand or vibe with any of these types of art paintings, sculptures, installations etc, for it to have meaning and value in the world.

About the frisbee - you might want to ask the owners of the shop who you paid $10 to where they got the idea. I am pretty sure it’ll trace back to Damien Hirst.

So you are the end user of Damien Hirst’s artwork. And you must dig the frisbee cause you paid $10. Multiply that times all the frisbee’a sold that that comes out to a sum. That sum and the sum total of cash made from those who replicate that idea far surpasses the cost of the painting I showed (which is a lot.)

I think the financial part of art is where you have an issue as oppose to the art itself. I think you need to place your frustration with the galleries and art brokers rather than the artist. The galleries control which artists are are successful and can manipulate prices. It is borderline criminal in a lot of ways.

You may find this passage from an decent article from Quartz in 2013:

The nature of art as a commodity inherently makes efficient prices, meaning prices that reflect all available information about value, impossible. Value is subjective; the intrinsic value of a painting is paint and canvas—beyond that value is often a matter of taste. This is why the industry has developed an intricate signaling process where the approval of a handful of galleries, collectors and museums, determines what is good and valuable. Dealers who own and work at art galleries invest many resources in building the artist’s brand. But artists often take years to mature and have uneven periods, so any perception that an artist is over-hyped or overpriced can be anathema to his career. Value in art can be arbitrary but brands are fragile.

I come from Art Center College of Design in Pasadena - it is a high end school that focuses on trades - for example all the top automotive designers in the world come from Art Center College of Design. So when you get in your BMW, or your VW the car was designed by a graduate from my alma mater. Stuff from the gear shift to the radio knobs to the entire look was designed by one of these guys. I was trained in commercial film. Dudes like Michael Bay who came from commercials come from my school. The point I am trying to make to you is only that you are having an issue with the world of Fine Art — but you are down with and have an easy time understanding the role an auto designer has when you see that badass 7-Series, or when you watch Armageddon on TNT. That’s cause other disciplines like graphic design, environmental design, automotive, photography, film, etc has a usefulness you identify with.

Fine Art for you is clearly more challenging for you to wrap your head around — i have tried my best to shed light on some of the aspects of it I understand. And I have tried to do some as humbly as possible.

Maybe check out some history. I keep referring to the Industrial Revolution and photography as being major players in the evolution of art from pastoral scenes and portraits to diamond covered skulls and gold toilets. It progresses from impressionism all the way to pop art. Anyway, maybe do a little research - you might find stuff that makes absolutely no sense, nor has any usefulness, but you may come across stuff you like and can appreciate beyond just a simple seascape .

I was on a date (with the lady who turned into my wife) so it wasn't the frisbee I was digging. But I think there's a difference between "that's neat" and "that's art". The paint disc didn't cross it for me, but I can also recognize that this guy's work influenced a large number of people. It doesn't make it art to me, but it's certainly pretty cool. That kind of impact isn't common, so that's impressive.

I also don't know that I can get on board with a gear shift knob being art. Especially not if it's super utilitarian. But that's a whole different discussion.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

I was on a date (with the lady who turned into my wife) so it wasn't the frisbee I was digging. But I think there's a difference between "that's neat" and "that's art". The paint disc didn't cross it for me, but I can also recognize that this guy's work influenced a large number of people. It doesn't make it art to me, but it's certainly pretty cool. That kind of impact isn't common, so that's impressive.

I also don't know that I can get on board with a gear shift knob being art. Especially not if it's super utilitarian. But that's a whole different discussion.

Your might wanna broaden your definition of art

 

[Tano]

My response

Sorry - couldn't help myself

 

[1maGoh]

Your might wanna broaden your definition of art

I am diametrically opposed to your viewpoint there. But it has been very fun and informative having this civil discussion with you.

 

[-X-]

This photo says more than the piece itself ever could. It’s a commentary on the dystopia were rapidly descending toward.

That’ll be $467,000, please.