He is rather good you know - its more than just drips etc - those other paintings in the image are also famous artist fakes.
Posted on 02/05/2016 9:20:49 AM PST by C19fan
In an art market governed largely by pretense and money, does a masterpiece have any intrinsic value? That question has emerged from a civil case brought by Sotheby’s chairman of Domenico de Sole and his wife, Eleanore, against Ann Freedman, former president of the Knoedler Gallery, the oldest and most respected gallery in New York until it closed in 2011 amidst a massive forgery scandal. Knoedler had sold some forty paintings claimed to be by abstract expressionists like Jackson Pollock, Barnett Newman, and Mark Rothko, all of which turned out to be forgeries created in Queens by a female artist named Pei-Shen Qian and peddled to the gallery by Glafira Rosales, a Long Island art dealer. (Rosales has already pled guilty to the scam; Qian, who fled to China, and two other co-conspirators currently in Spain, are awaiting extradition as part of an ongoing criminal investigation.)
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
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.
It’s upside down.
It’s a flower. Well, that’s what I used to tell Mom when I brought home a fingerpaint and she asked me “what in tarnation is THAT?”
I saw a demo of elephants painting at Riverbanks Zoo a couple of years ago. I was impressed. The elephants could paint better than I ever could.
You posted it upside down. Or maybe sideways, I’m not sure.
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!
We are not worthy of such genius.
And just waits till he starts kindergarten!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.