Got feedback on the new design? We're Listening! Send us Feedback

In Norway, cold cash turns into hot art »

Posted by: Deidre 1 year, 6 months ago

6.2

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 20

Propped: 43

Comments: 20

Click Prop It to Raise Score

Prop it

Norwegian artist Jan Christensen created a work he called "Relative Value" by pasting bills worth $16,300 on a sprawling 7-by-13 foot canvas. Christensen used real money out of his own pocket. Thieves smashed a window into the gallery late Sunday and made off with the cash-laden canvas, police said.

Read Full Story at timesunion.com

Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment

Comments So Far: 20

100%
Chunjinhao1 year, 6 months ago

That is not ART!!! If you want to see really art you need to OPEN YOUR OWN SOUL ANBEST ARTIST IN China, but I didn't continue to produce ART for money and I consider my self one of GREATEST, not artist, but creator of the art.
Reply
0%
Chunjinhao1 year, 6 months ago

Also an ARTIST is not Democrat and nor Republican either... a pure artist is an ARTIST... and you whom do not know about a RELLY art, please just go ahed and LEARN abotu it... Maybe this PLANET would be different?
Reply
0%
RunNJump1 year, 6 months ago

...got passion?
Reply
88%
IcCaRus1 year, 6 months ago

alrighty then....
all i can say is what a fool... did they honestly think no1 would steal it? duh!
btw Chunjinhao... art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder....
Reply
8 Replies
- 0%
  spiralthrough1 year, 6 months ago
  
  Art isn't in the eye of the beholder. That's taste. When people apply a relativistic view to art everything becomes all wishy-washy and no one knows what is and isn't art. I would wager that this modern philosophy is going to be looked on as foolish and ridiculous in a couple hundred years. I think Marcel Duchamp was playing a joke on us all when he started this nonsense, stopped making art, and started playing chess. With his fountain, it seems like he was saying, 'You guys will believe anything is art, screw art, I just want to relax and enjoy a chess game while you guys play your own silly game.' Conceptual 'art' is not art, it's simply visual philosophy or quasi or pseudo-philosophy, depending on the piece of work and the artist. Taking a found object and assigning one of these types of meanings to it doesn't make it art. It just makes it a symbol with the same sort of meaning words already have...making these works of 'art' not much more profound than a simple word...contd
  Reply
  5 Replies
  - 0%
    spiralthrough1 year, 6 months ago
    
    except that it has physical form, an example:
    Damien Hirst may be an artist, but is he making art? Where's the artistic craftsmanship in a shark floating in a tank of formaldehyde, where's the visualization, where's the understanding of value and color and form, Damien Hirst didn't scuplt it did he? It is nothing more than visual-philosophy, something entirely different from art. It's meant to make us think but a lot of things are meant to make us think. A large part of what makes real art is the study of light and form and technique. Anyway the loonies are taking over...Compare his preserved shark in a tank, which is one of the most expensive works in modern art to some of the great works of the past and it should be palpable what the difference is. Problem is most people aren't artists and don't understand what goes into a good work of art, and so they'll believe anything...
    Reply
    3 Replies
    - 0%
      I-am-the-cat1 year, 6 months ago
      
      There are a lot of things I don't like, but hesitate to say they are not art... having never seen this shark in a tank, I can't say whether it shows an understanding of color and form. But I wouldn't say that the fact he didn't sculpt the shark has much to do with it being art or not. That is the type of argument people have used to say photography is less of an art than painting. I'd have to see this shark thing, I guess. If he chose a specific tank, because the shark looked good in it, or some other small consideration maybe it's just art at a lower level, rather than not art at all. Maybe it is art, but is just sh1tty art instead of good art.
      Reply
      2 Replies
      - 0%
        spiralthrough1 year, 6 months ago
        
        one of my favorites (click to enlarge): well my links aren't working. Look up Albrecht Altdorpher, The Battle of Alexander
        and compare to Damien Hirst, The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living
        Photography is another argument altogether, lol. And with exceptions, it IS less of an art than painting, or scuplting, or drawing. To take a good photograph you need less artistic knowledge than what's needed to make a good work in one of these other mediums. You only need to be able to capture beauty, not create it, and it's limited by the fact that you can only photograph what actually exists. There are exceptions to the former though...
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        0%
        spiralthrough1 year, 6 months ago
        
        sculpting*
        Reply
  - 100%
    I-am-the-cat1 year, 6 months ago
    
    There are some people who will say minimalist works are not art, because they are too simple. But simple isn't always easy... Part of the problem with defining art is some people want to make the definition too strict.
    Reply
- 0%
  I-am-the-cat1 year, 6 months ago
  
  Art, like pornography, is difficult to define, but I know it when I see it.
  Reply
  1 Reply
  - 0%
    LABELDUDE1 year, 6 months ago
    
    When I see it, and it ain't Art, I know it.
    Reply
0%
Chunjinhao1 year, 6 months ago

Yes "IcCaRus" and ART is an innocent flower... which is my website name. I agree with you and I know about art, because my art is from MY HEART and not for money... I had many exhibitions and most of my paintings I gave away... and entire exhibition from 1999 at Chinas National Arts Museum,(highest place an artist can expose own art work) I still have all painting and giving away to different institution and galleries, not for sale, but to show and educate HUMANS about living harmonious way with NATURE...
Am I naive? I think so, because my paintings are teaching human about destruction off, not our Earth climate (global warming-global cooling) but our activity is destroying (everyday) so many species from our ECO system which was created by Mother Nature...
Thank you for "art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder", but how many people you know CAN REALLY SEE THE ART AS A ARTIST HAD FELT WHEN PAINTEED OR CREATEDE IT...?
Reply
6 Replies
- 0%
  ScottMiller1 year, 6 months ago
  
  So, your position is that once some one pays you for art, it is no longer good art and that being compensated for your work invalidates all of your artistic ability?
  Man that is just a bunch of crap that the Party Elites feed the proletariat. Go read George Orwell's Animal Farm and get back to me.
  As far as art and money go. Check out www.pauljackson.com. That guy gets paid and I think his art is great. And the fact that he gets paid for it means that he gets to practice and improve his art without having to split art time with work time.
  Reply
  5 Replies
  - 100%
    spiralthrough1 year, 6 months ago
    
    There IS a difference between real art and commercial art though.
    Reply
    4 Replies
    - 0%
      ScottMiller1 year, 6 months ago
      
      Yes there is. A coke sign is commercial art or Americana. Painting something and selling it is just a good away to make a living. I have noticed that MOST of the artists who complain about artists that make money do so because no one is interested in their art.
      Reply
      1 Reply
      - 0%
        spiralthrough1 year, 6 months ago
        
        I'm not against people making money on their art. I'm against people calling paintings 'fine art' when they're painted by someone who's painting a multitude of watered-down 'fine art' paintings. I realize there's a place for it, that people like to hang a 'pretty' picture on their wall, and that not everyone can afford top-notch art. But still, with exceptions commercial art lacks emotion and expression; I only see simulated expression. A machine might as well be painting them. The naviety of people bothers me when people gush about how great some of it is when it's really no better than what i've seen elephants paint. Just browse ebay's art section and you should see what I mean. There's so many 15 minute pieces people are trying to pass off as fine art-and some are actually selling.
        Reply
    - 0%
      LABELDUDE1 year, 6 months ago
      
      "There IS a difference between real art and commercial art though."
      No there isn't.
      Reply
      1 Reply
      - 0%
        spiralthrough1 year, 6 months ago
        
        Maybe i should have worded it differently: fine art vs commercial art (specifically the type being passed off as fine art). Calling commercial art fine art is like calling a news article poetry.
        Reply
0%
braveone1 year, 6 months ago

too funny, what'd he expect????
guess he found out what the "relative Value" of his art is,
I hope they put the cash to a better use than he did.
Reply