He is rather good you know - its more than just drips etc - those other paintings in the image are also famous artist fakes.
The emperor’s new clothes.
They paid for a signature because they were told it was cool. Dumb asses
He is rather good you know - its more than just drips etc - those other paintings in the image are also famous artist fakes.
The painting in question, Untitled, 1956. It looks perfectly genuine to me.
I am reminded of the man who had an unsigned de Kooning painting he wanted to sell, valued at several hundred thousand dollars. Then it was taken to a de Kooning expert who pronounced it to be a fake.
It’s value went from several hundred thousand dollars to just the value of the paint and canvas. The quality of the painting did not matter.
Anyone who wants to see an expose of the art world should view the movie F for FAKE narrated by Orson Wells, but pay careful attention to it!
As for Picasso, he declared one of his paintings a fake. When it was pointed out by a visitor who had watched him paint that picture he said...”I can paint false Picassos just as well as anybody,” Picasso replied.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F_for_Fake
It’s easy to fake crap.
Bingo.
I remember Craig Ferguson’s frequent satire of Mark Rothko’s work, to the point of actually having an art expert on his otherwise farcial comedy show, to say that Rothko’s work is perhaps the prime example of “emperor-has-no-clothes” posturing in the art world. The lionizing of Rothko’s pointless, dreary, depressing and aggressively nihilistic canvases just galled Craig totally. Loved it!
In modern art, greatness has moved from the actual piece of work to the words used to describe said work. I.e., the critics are the artists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIVgUjj6RxU
Description:F for Fake (French: Vérités et mensonges, "Truths and lies") is the last major film completed by Orson Welles, who directed, co-wrote, and starred in the film. Initially released in 1974, it focuses on Elmyr de Hory's recounting of his career as a professional art forger; de Hory's story serves as the backdrop for a fast-paced, meandering investigation of the natures of authorship and authenticity, as well as the basis of the value of art. Loosely a documentary, the film operates in several different genres and has been described as a kind of film essay.
Far from serving as a traditional documentary on Elmyr de Hory, the film also incorporates Welles's companion Oja Kodar, notorious "hoax-biographer" Clifford Irving, and Orson Welles as himself.
Why is it important to be able to spot a fake Rothko?