Posted on 10/17/2006 9:01:12 PM PDT by verum ago
Pablo Picasso's "dream" painting has turned into a $139 million nightmare for Steve Wynn.
In an accident witnessed by a group that included Barbara Walters and screenwriters Nora Ephron and Nicholas Pileggi, Wynn accidentally poked a hole in Picasso's 74-year-old painting, "Le Reve," French for "The Dream."
A day earlier, Wynn had finalized a record $139 million deal for the painting of Picasso's mistress, Wynn told The New Yorker magazine
The accident occurred as a gesturing Wynn, who suffers from retinitis pigmentosa, an eye disease that affects peripheral vision, struck the painting with his right elbow, leaving a hole the size of a silver dollar in the left forearm of Marie-Theresa Walter, Picasso's 21-year-old mistress.
"Oh shit, look what I've done," Wynn said, according to Ephron, who gave her account in a blog published on Monday.
Wynn paid $48.4 million for the Picasso in 1997 and had agreed to sell it to art collector Steven Cohen. The $139 million would have been $4 million higher than the previous high for a work of art, according to The New Yorker.
Cosmetics magnate Ronald Lauder paid $135 million in July for Gustav Klimt's 1907 portrait "Adele Bloch-Bauer I."
Wynn plans to restore "Le Reve" and keep it.
And I'm sure it means more to you than any Pis-caso could ever mean to anyone. I love it.
Just like they had on the Roseanne show for all those years that they struggled to stay afloat. Then when the won they lottery and redecorated the house, took the picture down and started wearing furs and bling, the show went off the air. It's easy to see that we "common" folk have our heads screwed on straight. It's those rich folk who don't know what the heck to do with their money so they buy Picasso's and all that useless junk to fill up their lives and the more they get the less it pleases them so they keep compounding their error. IMHO of course.
ROFLMAO.
I'll bet you wouldn't turn down $135 mil. if you had the painting though, would you? HEHE.
It might increase the "abstract" value as well. LOL.
It's all subjective. I agree with you choice of Art, but I don't agree with your opinion.
Uh, that's her shoulder, I think. Then again it is a Picaso, so it very well could be a pud.
That's an extremely restrained response considering what I would have been saying.
Funny, I've heard that very same opinion from some artists that I have met. Is that an "artist in thing" or something?
It's ok, we like hearing from pretencious art admirers too.
Seriously, what the heck is there to understand about the work of art?? You either like it, or you don't. Art is about entertainment, not education.
When we want education, crack open a textbook, not an art gallery.
Now, as much of a frigin liberal leftist creap as Warhol may have been he almost singlehandedly created art as commercial media. You may not agree that he was a great artist, but there are many artists who owe their commercial success to him.
LOL.
excellent post
Have a three year old paint something. Put it next to the later Picaso and ask an art critic which is better. Half will probably tell you that the three year old's work is. LOL.
That's Art? No, it's kitsch. This is Art!
ROFLMAO!!
Of course the letigious left would say, "Well, you shouldn't have put it out if you didn't want me to put my elbow through it, and by the way, I'm suing you for hurting my elbow, boohoo!!"
What's that guy's name who throws paint on a canvas and calls it a masterpiece? He supposed to be taking the art world by storm; IMO he's taking them for a ride, LOL.
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.