日志
现代艺术
热度 12 |
最近带孩子去了华盛顿，不能免俗地又参观了若干博物馆。National Gallery of Art 是每次不能漏过的，虽然也不敢说长了什么艺术细胞。不过这次一致同意不去收藏现代艺术的东馆。
不可否认少数现代艺术还是给人以艺术上的愉悦乃至震撼的，可是这样的作品实在稀有，在我这样俗人看来多数不过是想象力或者能力贫乏之下的故作玄虚，我小孩用了颇不敬的语言描述这样的作品，很有笑果。然而有时候不免自疑，以为或许真的有我们不可及的鉴赏品味在。
今天看到一个新闻，极大的鼓舞了我这俗人的虚荣心。
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/21/justice/new-york-art-fraud-scheme/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
说的是一对西班牙艺术商卖了几十万美元的 ‘一些著名现代艺术画家的作品’ 给若干私人及画廊，实际上却是一位中国来的街头画家（Pei Shen Qian）的仿品，现在东窗事发了。
私人也就罢了，说明看起来全世界的土豪都差不多，画廊里的专家们的鉴赏品味似乎也未见高明呀。
“As alleged, the defendants tricked victims into paying more than $33 million for worthless paintings which they fabricated in the names of world-famous artists...” 这里 ‘worthless’ 和 ‘$33 million’ 的区别说明这些所谓现代艺术作品的价值在于名声，或者叫做炒作，而和艺术无关。
“ In court documents, prosecutors allege he received between several hundred and several thousand dollars for paintings the art dealers and galleries sold for millions.”
看起来这个才是真正的价值？
不可否认少数现代艺术还是给人以艺术上的愉悦乃至震撼的，可是这样的作品实在稀有，在我这样俗人看来多数不过是想象力或者能力贫乏之下的故作玄虚，我小孩用了颇不敬的语言描述这样的作品，很有笑果。然而有时候不免自疑，以为或许真的有我们不可及的鉴赏品味在。
今天看到一个新闻，极大的鼓舞了我这俗人的虚荣心。
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/21/justice/new-york-art-fraud-scheme/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
说的是一对西班牙艺术商卖了几十万美元的 ‘一些著名现代艺术画家的作品’ 给若干私人及画廊，实际上却是一位中国来的街头画家（Pei Shen Qian）的仿品，现在东窗事发了。
私人也就罢了，说明看起来全世界的土豪都差不多，画廊里的专家们的鉴赏品味似乎也未见高明呀。
“As alleged, the defendants tricked victims into paying more than $33 million for worthless paintings which they fabricated in the names of world-famous artists...” 这里 ‘worthless’ 和 ‘$33 million’ 的区别说明这些所谓现代艺术作品的价值在于名声，或者叫做炒作，而和艺术无关。
“ In court documents, prosecutors allege he received between several hundred and several thousand dollars for paintings the art dealers and galleries sold for millions.”
看起来这个才是真正的价值？
发表评论 评论 (9 个评论)
- 回复 仁
- 如果他只得到几千甚至几百，说明画廊知道是赝品。记得一本英语教材里就有一文说英国的有钱怪老自己画了很多画假称是从已故的艺术家收集来的，邀请名人，包括评论家，来参观，一时引起很多好评。只是很快他就道出了真相。文章里说那些话一文不值，是因为是假的，违法的。
- 回复 洗心
- 转发一篇评论给大家笑一笑。
`The Idiot's Guide to Art'
BY DAVE BARRY
(This classic Dave Barry column was originally published Jan. 18, 2004.)
Whenever I write about art, I get mail from the Serious Art Community informing me that I am a clueless idiot. So let me begin by stipulating that I am a clueless idiot. This is probably why I was unable to appreciate a work of art I viewed recently, titled: ``Chair.''
I saw ``Chair'' at Art Basel, a big art show held recently on Miami Beach. It attracted thousands of Serious Art People, who wear mostly black outfits and can maintain serious expressions no matter what work of art they are viewing. This is hard, because a lot of Serious Art consists of bizarre or startlingly unattractive objects, or ``performances,'' wherein artists do something Conceptual, such as squirt Cheez Whiz into an orifice that has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for snack toppings.
But no matter what the art is, a Serious Art Person will view it with the somber expression of a radiologist examining X-rays of a tumor. Whereas an amateur will eventually give himself away by laughing; or saying ``Huh?''; or (this is the most embarrassing) asking an art-gallery person: ``Is this wastebasket a piece of art? Or can I put my gum wrapper in it?''
But back to Art Basel: I didn't go to the main show. I went to an officially sanctioned satellite show called ``Art Positions,'' which was a group of large, walk-in shipping containers set up on the beach, serving as mini art galleries. Serious Art People drifted blackly from container to container, solemnly examining the tumors.
I managed not to say anything stupid until I encountered a slide projector sitting on the floor, projecting a rectangle of white light with twitching lens dust onto the wall. I asked the gallery person if there was supposed to be a slide in the projector; he patiently explained that, no, this was a work of art titled ``Autofocus Slide Projector Dust.''
In another container there was a work of art consisting of a video, repeated over and over, showing a man -- not in peak physical condition, I might add -- rollerblading around a vast empty space, stark naked. I'm proud to say I betrayed no emotion while viewing this work, although my daughter, who is 3, said, quite loudly: ``You can see his tushy! Yuck!''
She is young, and has no art training.
Anyway, in the corner of one container there was a ratty old collapsed armchair -- worn, dirty, leaking stuffing, possibly housing active vermin colonies. I asked the gallery person if the chair was art, and she said yes, it was a work titled ``Chair.'' I asked her what role the artist had played in creating ``Chair.'' She said: ``He found it.''
``Chair'' is for sale. The price is $2,800. Really. I looked up ``Chair'' on a Serious Art Internet site, artcritical.com, which said: ``The chair offers not a weedy patina of desuetude but an apotheosis of its former occupant.''
See, I missed that altogether, about the desuetude and the apotheosis. I thought it was just a crappy old junk chair some guy took off a trash pile and was now trying to sell for 2,800 clams.
I was also baffled by an artwork called ``Moonwalk,'' presented by a Paris art gallery. You walked into the gallery/container, and it was empty, just blank white walls. Around the ceiling were a half-dozen speakers making a high-pitched sonar sound, like this: ``boop.'' That was the art: ``boop.'' Sitting outside on a folding chair was a gallery person, smoking Marlboros. I wondered what it would be like to fly all the way from Paris to Miami, only to spend four days sitting outside an empty shipping container going ``boop.'' I would go insane. I would have an apotheosis of freaking desuetude.
In another container, there was a work that consisted of a hole drilled in the floor, and some weeds stuck in it. I believe the price on that was $6,000. While I was examining it, I heard one Serious Art Person say to another (I swear): ``Wouldn't that be wonderful in the foyer?''
I want to state, for the record, that there was also some very nice-looking art on display. And I want to repeat that I am a clueless idiot. So you Serious Art People don't need to write letters reminding me. I agree that you know MUCH more about art than I do, OK?
So YOU buy the chair.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2009/09/13/1210737/the-idiots-guide-to-art.html#storylink=cpy
- 回复 黑洞的颜色
- 问题是画廊不知道/没能力鉴定。
仁: 如果他只得到几千甚至几百，说明画廊知道是赝品。记得一本英语教材里就有一文说英国的有钱怪老自己画了很多画假称是从已故的艺术家收集来的，邀请名人，包括评论 ...
画是被那西班牙艺术商卖给画廊的。
- 回复 黑洞的颜色
洗心: 转发一篇评论给大家笑一笑。
`The Idiot's Guide to Art'
BY DAVE BARRY
(This classic Dave Barry column was originally published Jan. 18, 2004.)
When ...
- 回复 MacArthur
- 不查字典都看不懂，一看就特高大上，$2800值了。。。
洗心: ...The chair offers not a weedy patina of desuetude but an apotheosis of its former occupant
