args

Money wasted on art works is absurd

Gap in manufacturing and sale value Modern, alive artists have become damn rich. Furthermore, if the money is not helping the original, dirt-poor creator, why does selling it justify such a price? The guy that dug it up from the dead artists home has not invested much time or money, yet here you go, 20 million for you. Height of nonsense. Graffiti 1. Gang signs look pretty cool actually. And the offensive ones are the reason why it is illegal and termed vandalism. 2. Reason given above. 3. They can sell photos of it, or take an impression of fresh, spray-can paint. Or they could do it on their own damn walls. Blank Blue painting with a line is hard-work and symbolic? Furthermore, art work of famous artists is trash according to the majority, but the rich autocrats use "symbolism and other trash" to justify their senseless purchases. Buy my trash as well. I have another book that I created for about 5 years, it has good grammar at least, come on, pay up a few million. Know my next project? I will make a cross on a canvas, make up some symbolism about it, maybe it represents good forces being trapped by evil and the outside help unable to penetrate the boundaries made by evil, and lie that I spent I life-time on it (not all artists do that, but then you never know), get a few friends to vouch for me and become a mega-millionaire. You wait and see. Mona Lisa is just the painting of a woman. Stop giving random reasons. So what if it influenced other artists? That should be considered bad, for plagiarism and the unoriginal ideas. Wouldn't it be better that artists cook up their own painting, song, and book from their own inspiration? I think so too. I don't get how technological advancements and a woman are related, unless you are a lost romantic. X-box, games, books, movies are art available to the masses. Why not the same with visual art? I want to lower the value. The value for it has been set far higher than it actually should be. X-box already has a few million copies, so there. It can't be even more mass-produced as it needs metal and electrical components, and is a difficult as well as a costly manufacturing process. But since we have many tons of newspapers, photo copying art shouldn't be that costly. A book written by hand is unique. Why not sell it for a few billion? It gives all the things (culture, history, symbolism) that art does. It is a completely unique story and a great experience. Yet you still typed it out and sold millions of copies of it? That is exactly what you are doing with art. Why not mass produce the paintings and sell them to the masses, rather than giving history only to the filthy rich who won't share, or to the museums that charge us much more heavily on their tickets, and are not open all the time? The art museum charged me about 10 dollars just to view the painting. They don't even let me touch it, even if I say I will not damage it. Shouldn't I have not gone there at all? Contention 1 Art is not important/valuable as it most artists have not suffered or worked for their art, nor have they created anything great. And the fact that the money doesn't go to the dead artists like Picasso and Vinci, but to filthy rich art merchants. Contention 2 Art will be a time-travelling device for the extremely rich, which is not fair. I recommend mass-producing the paintings through photocopy and selling it, while the original gets a much cheaper public exhibition for all. There are many more devices of history, such as history books, this debate and other data on the internet, other novels such as autobiographies, music and sometimes realistic movies. Art is not an efficient device for conveying history, for a blue canvas doesn't seem very historic, and while invisible art may be hoax, I don't get what those people were looking at in the photo. The guardian Why does the source seems to be rather sarcastic???? It seems to imply that it was a waste of money (now you get why I hate symbolism). Besides, it but expresses an opinion that the painting was good, and we are not supposed to consider the word of media as absolute. Caveman It says don't take their word for it. Yet, the blue painting price was true. If you bother to verify the others, you would find that they too had the same price. My sources http://www.theverge.com... (million x-boxes made and sold)