A Rare Find Or Good Marketing?

Recently, a DaVinci painting sold for 450 million dollars at an auction which is surprisingly low (the artist's inventory is just under 20 paintings) for such a rare find. What is shocking to me is the fact that the buyer ( who is nameless) bought it based on the hype generated by the auction house. 

Clearly, anyone can see that it is a flawed painting in that some sections have warn down and that solid color for a background does not look like a DaVinci at all. If you use the Mona Lisa as a reference, you can see that DaVinci took more time to paint the details of the background than the actual figure itself. 

My personal opinion is that this painting is knock-off of a DaVinci work, completed by an unskilled apprentice around the same time as DaVinci (1500AD). I am no scholar nor do I hold a degree in art history. My only knowledge is that I have practiced oil painting for 15+ years and know this is not legit. There needed to be more time to study the work of art to find out who the artist really is but apparently the auction house had no time, they wanted the money now.

A form of painting that must go.

The visual artists of today must interpret and adapt to the changes in today's modern world. His role is not clear cut as the digital world has opened up many different paths to take.  I feel that this is a very exciting time for the artist to achieve great works in a very short time.

Having said all that, I don't know why we still have artists engaging in photo-realism. Yes, it was shocking and a bit controversial fifty some years ago when artists such as Richard Estes created very large canvases of photo-realistic scenes of New York city but like hula hoops, muscle cars, and punk rock, we move on.

Everyone today carries a camera on their phone and can take ten or twenty pictures a day. Then with a third grade education, you can make adjustments in Photoshop and have a professional quality photo. So what is the attraction with a photo on canvas done in oil paint? You cant display this work on your wall because you would become bored with it within hours.

The root of the problem involves our education of these artists. I am still walking into classrooms and observing students painting from photographs as if no other teaching method exists.

Why be educated as an artist?

In today's art world, it appears that the more education and training you receive as an artist, the less likely your paintings will sell. I say that only in light of the fact that a recent painting from an untrained artist named Basquiat sold for over 100 million dollars. 

This is nothing new as history will tell you that American artists in the 1950's were creating paintings with very little formal training and became very successful including Jackson Pollack who starting dripping paint right on the canvas.

What is interesting about Basquiat (who died in 1987 at age 27) is that his work represents no one- past, present or future. I know of no artist who said they were inspired by his work and no art movement came about as a result of his instant success. 

If this young painter enrolled in art school in the fall of 1978, the structure, course load, and student body would have destroyed him. As the story is told, Basquiat was living out of a cardboard box at this time and had no means of paying for art school even if he wanted to go.

Which brings me to this point- If you want to be a million dollar artist, skip art school because it will ruin you.

The Obama Library, er..Museam

The new designs are out and the Obama (Center) look interesting but it is early and things usually change. The Chicago Tribune pointed out that you really can not call it the library in the digital age and so a new era in presidential centers is born.

I might not have been paying attention to the location when it was selected. I knew three locations were picked out and all were located on the south side of the city. The Obama's have chosen historic Jackson Park as their location which is great but it looks like the site is were historic buildings once stood for the 1893 Worlds Fair. With that in mind, shouldn't the building have more of a classical approach to be more in line with the near by Museum of Science and Industry ( the only building left from the Worlds Fair) ?

Another concern is that the tree buildings that make up the Obama campus face west with no views of the park and the main building that is about six stories tall has very few windows that overlook the park and its beautiful lagoons. The location of the Obama Center is being wasted by the architects failure to understand the setting. Its kind of like the Lucus Museum on the lake front with no windows at all facing the lake. 

The Story Now Has An Ending

George Lucas has finally made a decision on his Museum of Narrative Art which will now be located in the city of Los Angeles (where it belongs). 

Lets be frank, it is a museum about Star Wars. All the weird costumes and artifacts from a galaxy far, far away will be on display here. While spending time in the Museum, you might learn how the Star Wars movie was made and then after lunch you can drive down to Universal Studios and actually watch them film a movie. Wow! Los Angeles, Hollywood, The Lucas Museum all in a one afternoon!

When he tried to get that choice lake front location in Chicago with help from his buddy, Rahm, he was very secretive about what his "narrative art" collection was all about. We heard about the Norman Rockwells but that was all. It was only after his lakefront location was rejected, did we find out that it also included works by R. Crumb (gasp!) and NC Wyeth.

The building design also changed and I like the LA design more than the Chicago's proposal. It is more streamlined to fit in an urban environment. I must to say, Chicago dodged a bullet here and I doubt if George ever comes back to Chicago, even for a visit.