Earlier this week saw the sale at auction of “The Scream” by Edvard Munch. It sold for the sum of $119.9 million dollars. As you would expect numerous news articles have been written about the sale, such as this one from the bbc news. Quoting from this article the arts editor states “demand for Grade A art far outstrips supply”. This makes me wonder just what is “Grade A” art. How could anybody consider that this work is anywhere in the same league as something like the Mona Lisa, or the works of any of the great masters. If interested you can find a list of the most expensive paintings here.
Is “Modern Art”, “Expressionism” and “Surrealism” simply a “cover” for what some may consider to be “great art” by simply saying that it is “supposed” to provide a subjective and distorted view thereby detracting from the reality that many works of similar technical standard could be found in the sketchbooks of most primary school children?
I have read a number of articles saying that this piece of work is “Iconic” and can be seen around everywhere. This is the first time I can ever recall seeing it. Perhaps I have seen it in the past, but would have simply dismissed it as a scribble and nothing even remotely resembling what I would imagine many would consider “Art”.
For something to be truly magnificent should it not require the devotion of all the artists thought, essence, time, skill & dedication to the crafting of the work. Many of the great artists slaved for years to bring us some wonderful works of art.
How would I value the Scream
Many of the news articles on the web have associated comments from people both for and against this work & and price paid. As with anything whether its the purchase of a car, bicycle, a painting, curtains, carpet, paint for your wall, a television one most weight up for themselves how much that particular object is worth to you. Why does one consider “The Scream” to be worth 120 million dollars. How much would I be willing to spend on a work of art such as this? Personally even if I were a trillionaire I would be hard pushed to spend 100 dollars on this (even 10 dollars for that matter), one could perhaps give a good argument that the frame is well over 100 years old, this may make me consider purchasing such a piece. Ten to 100 dollars may be a good investment for the frame, the “art” within the frame could be removed, and the frame put to some good use to actually display a work of “art” that would be pleasing, thought provoking, elegant, beautiful.
Is it something anybody could create
Artists would of course argue that had the Mona Lisa been sold for 500 million dollars would I have bothered blogging about it – the answer would most likely be no – why? something like “The Scream” could have been drawn by more or less anybody capable of holding a pencil, yet the number of people in the world (past, present or future) with the skill to create a work of art such as the Mona Lisa are very few and far between. Therefore a work or “art” like the Mona Lisa is truly rare & unique – how could you place a price on something like that.
Is Great Art created by a lack of Art
One could argue that by looking at a piece of work like “The Scream” it is the thoughts and emotions that it generates in yourself that are key to the greatness of the work. So it is the lack of detail in the work that makes it great. Often having objects within a photograph out of focus can greatly help to emphasis the piece for example.
Applying “Modern Art” to Exams
One could apply this concept of the lack of skill / the rudimentary nature of the work as being its greatest asset to many other domains? Given that I lecture, mark exams, courseworks and the like, could I apply the same principle to my marking? Take an exam for example, usually one must answer a number of questions. Lets take the example of “write an essay on the history of the Internet”. In marking such a question one would probably give full marks if the answer included all the major milestones over the past decades on the evolution of same. From the perspective of “Art” an answer similar to “The Internet began and eventually evolved into what it is today” should probably garner full marks as well! What if the student decided to not answer the question, i.e. given that most would at least attempt to answer the question, should the student who decides to use their free will and not answer the question be awarded the same marks (or even better) than somebody who accurately described the evolution of the Internet over the course of a 2 or 3 page answer? Could one not draw a similar depiction between many works of modern art and that of the great masters? Arguing that it is the precise lack of clarity that makes the work thought provoking and open to interpretation – thereby everybody takes something different from the work.
The Value of a Line
Some years ago I visited an art gallery in Austria and saw a canvas that had a single black line on it. The line was fairly thick at one end and tapered at the other. A price tag of €4000 was assigned to it. Why is something such as this considered “Art”? I could have created it myself in the matter of a few seconds! Was it the unique angle the line was at that allowed for such a price to be placed on it? If one was to apply this concept to “The Scream” then one could simply count the number of strokes necessary and multiply by €4000 to get its true value !!
Interpretation
To what degree does the artists own interpretation of what the piece of work signifies have on the value. One could draw an orange blob in the center of a white canvas and say that “it represented the sun, that which is essential to all life here on earth, the particular shade or orange used appeals to some particular emotional sense trapped inside all of us, the shape of the blob being circular in nature is infinite, having no beginning and no end……….”, one of course would need to have a suitable title to go with it perhaps “life as we know it”. On the other hand one could give it a title like “orange blob” and description of “this is an orange blob created using one single brush stroke”. Here we have the very same piece of art, one may be valued in the millions gaining international recognition the other not considered to be art at all!
Is this art?
Is this art?
Is this art?
Is this art?
Is this art?
Is this art?
I think ‘art’ is any creative expression of a person…could be decorating as you have above, hairstyles, sculptures, paintings, photoshop art like I do, musical expression, etc. But ‘great art’…that’s a different story. I would have to agree with you that I don’t see why “The Scream” would be considered a great work of art either. I think it’s moreso than a thick black line like you described. I’m afraid I don’t get it either.
Hi Anne, thanks for the visit. I am not an artist but do appreciate good / great art. Cathedral, museums, old building are always high on my list of things to see whenever I visit a new place. Its amazing what can be classified as art these days. Have seen some really nice photoshop work by some students of late.
Although I love The Scream, I do have to question the price. But what about athletes and their exorbitant salaries? It’s too bad that Munch isn’t getting the $120 million — but at least he didn’t die penniless as many artists do.
Thanks for the visit and comment, agree with you regarding footballers and the like getting ridiculous salaries. Perhaps you can enlighten me on what makes The Scream a “Grade A” work or art. Is it comparable to the work of Michelangelo or Raphael for example.
When a piece of art reaches iconic status — The Beatles and Beethoven’s Fifth come to mind — it surpasses the “is it worth it” test in my opinion. I used The Scream in one of my doctoral presentations, in education, not art history, and everyone in the room knew what I was intending to portray. I think this quote from Wikipedia (don’t judge me) really expresses my thoughts on this.
“In summing up the painting’s impact author Martha Tedeschi has stated: “Whistler’s Mother, Wood’s American Gothic, Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa and Edvard Munch’s The Scream have all achieved something that most paintings—regardless of their art historical importance, beauty, or monetary value—have not: they communicate a specific meaning almost immediately to almost every viewer. These few works have successfully made the transition from the elite realm of the museum visitor to the enormous venue of popular culture.”[45]
That being said, I was recently in the modern wing of the Chicago Art Institute and found most of the new acquisitions to be ludicrous as works of art. I like the older works from the first half of the 20th century much better than current “art.”
My working class roots and only one course ever in Art History don’t qualify me to comment on what is or isn’t great art, but what does amaze me about art is that the rich man has always got millions to spend on art, or sport, or personal entertainment, but when it comes time to give me a few more pennies per hour, then the &$^(*@!# is on the verge of bankruptcy.
I guess spending money on the acquisition of art is an investment for the future.
Daniel,
I find your points regarding The Scream to be quite amusing. The person who purchased The Scream I am sure feels it is Great Art, the person who did not, I am sure feels it isn’t Great Art. I am certainly no expert in the Arts, but like you I am drawn to Museums, Architecture and beautiful art etc. I don’t believe great art can be defined in such black and white terms. I like the Mona Lisa, but personally don’t think it’s a great acheivement in the Art World but it’s history and mystery of who she is seems to be what has defined the “Greatness” of that painting. In fact, I am sure you would agree that Leonardo Da Vinci painted numerous painting that are far more exquisite. It’s a fantastic work, I have seen it in person, not all that exciting frankly.
The Expressionist period was a sort of “Wild Abandon” of what artists and critics felt was legitimate art, but what it did was change the art world for ever. Where would we be without Van Gogh, Munch, El Greco Nesch and so many others. And that painting you saw for $4000 Euro, well probably not by an artist that will be remembered for ever, but even that artist has a hand in developing and changing the art world for the future.
The Scream is bolstered in price because of it’s history and the history of Munch when he was inspired to paint it. It’s also bolstered in price because there are only 4 of these paintings in the world, 3 are in museums and one and only one is hanging in someones home, that one cost $120 million dollars and in the future will be sold for more than that because it is rare.
I have an extensive collection of Native American Art and I have friends who think it isn’t really art, but that is their opinion. I recall something my Grandmother told me when I was young, she was an art collector. She said, Scott great art is in the eye of the beholder, what you like, others do not and vice versa. A painting that speaks to you and pulls from you emotions that you didn’t expect, is Great Art, to you.
I will remember that conversation with her for the rest of my life, because I am a collector and I enjoy all art that I see, but only Great Art means something to me.
Great Post Daniel.
Scott
As bloggers, when we get people to talk about what we’ve written we have achieved our goal. Blogging becomes a two way street. I loved this conversation!
I agree it’s an excellent post and will most certainly provoke a long conversations with differing view points.
Thanks for the comment, this certainly is blogging. Hopefully I will learn a bit more about what many consider to me art.
Judging by what I know, being the daughter of a painter, The Scream has elements of craft: good composition, good color palette, stylized depiction of water and sky and people. It also captures something universal about the human condition–two human figures walking peacefully in the direction of one who is clearly distressed/full of angst/carrying the weight of the world/at the brink of despair. These two qualities combined–craft plus universal–meets my definition of art. Is it great art? Who knows? Only time will tell. It isn’t nearly as old as the Mona Lisa. Its value may simply be trendy right now.
Judging by what I know, being the daughter of a painter, The Scream has elements of craft: good composition, good color palette, stylized depiction of water and sky and people. It also captures something universal about the human condition–two human figures walking peacefully in the direction of one who is clearly distressed/full of angst/carrying the weight of the world/at the brink of despair. These two qualities combined–craft plus universal–meets my definition of art. Is it great art? Who knows? Only time will tell. It isn’t nearly as old as the Mona Lisa.
Thanks for this wonderful insight & visit to my blog. The following Applet is quite interesting that allows one to explore the Mona Lisa through the use of the Golden Ratio (http://britton.disted.camosun.bc.ca/mona/jbmona.htm) quite simply all the proportions seem to fit the ratio 1:1.618. This is seen throughout nature and architecture, from the lengths of our bones in relation to one another, the structure of our DNA, to the pyramids in Egypt. I would imagine that the super imposing the Graphic Vectors – i.e. how the work is formed would add to the understanding composition.
Munch painted several version of Skrik (The Scream). One of them hung in the National gallery of Norway. In 1994 the painting was stolen and the thieves used a ladder to access the building.
On the wall where “Scream” had hung the thieves left a postcard depicting a few old men who laughed. The card read, “Thanks for poor security.”
So, what is art? I think Charles Bukowski said it best when he said:
Thanks for all that info, I hadn’t known any of that. I therefore assume that for any painting to be of any real value it must first of all be stolen !
I had a painting that was stolen!
It’s the mosque in this post: http://cardinalguzman.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/the-place-where-i-created/
Stolen twice !
Most of the “art” in our home would consist of pieces either we, our parents, our grandparents, our kids have created. Is it art? It means something to me and restores my mind to the essence of its creation. Would it bring high prices at an auction? Never. But I would never pay a high price for a piece of art. I would pay a higher price to be able to share Mona Lisa’s private amusement or to understand the feelings of Munch when he painted the Scream.
Thought provoking post, by the way!
Glad the post getting those synapses firing, that’s blogging at work I guess. The combined thoughts and opinions of different people on a topic. Many heads are better than just one.
Certainly is a piece of art is created by someone close to you it has greater meaning and perhaps personal value to you. The advent of digital photography now allows us to easily capture all those memories of things we have done, places we have seen. Some of these photographs may not mean much to others but could have great sentimental value to the photographer or those present in the photo.
Good blog! Thank you.
Lots to reflect on.
The ridiculous prices investors pay for “Art” makes me very sad. There are thousands and thousands of living artists who could do with some assistance from these billionaire purchasers to continue on with their excellent work. They don’t ask much – just an honest price for their creation. Prices in the millions for old, tired, restored paintings is folly.
The purchasers, most of the time, don’t know the least little thing about art. They’ve been told by some auction house or some consultant what to buy to improve their financial portfolio. The purchased work goes into a vault that only the greedy investor has access to and it’s lost to the world.
But this isn’t a question of Art. It’s a question of Investment. The commodification of art is a sad thing. The work of art’s intrinsic value disappears under the weighty, mighty dollar. But it’s the way of the world.
My suggestion – buy contemporary art. There are paintings for every taste whether high realism, classical portraiture, abstract, impressionist work and many other new forms. And you will keep the arts and the artists alive for the next generation. If you have to have the famous painter, get one printed on canvas. Print media is so good these days, no one will know the difference.
Wow what a great comment, thanks for taking the time out to write this. Art of course can mean different things to different people, it could trigger a happy memory for example. Do you know if most of the focus today is on “Modern Art”/ “Surrealism” … over the realism seen in classical portraiture and landscapes of old.
Nicely written article, and as usual the question of “What is Art” is thought provoking
Perhaps it’s an art to be able to sell something for a high value regardless of its underlying “art-ness”, whatever that is? I personally adhere to the notion that all of life’s activities embody art – from microscopic to macroscopic. Art portrays a part of life so that a maximum number of people can appreciate it with their senses. So depending on how life has been lived, one would resonate differently to different expressions of art. The good news is, there’s art for everyone, rich or poor, if one sense it with their true self 
I certainly agree that art can be found in everything, even something like computer programming. A well known book called “The Art of Computer Programming” has been around since the late 60′s.
Indeed…but we’re so busy trying to make something sell that I never ever had the time to seriously read it. Really sad
I’d usually step up to defend the art, but I have to agree in this case. Munch is highly overrated, and no one would care if it wasn’t for the pop culture references, and thefts, the the piece has attracted.
Thanks for stopping by and the comment. So good or bad all that’s needed is some media hype and the artwork gets catapulted to “Grade A” art. !!
Yeah, exactly right – but, on the other hand, I could do with some media hype.
At the risk of repeating what a lot of others have already mentioned, I think this is a great post. I am no expert in arts, but I do get what you are saying. A lot of times I ‘don’t get’ the art behind the image / painting / sculpture, but then, I feel art is what you perceive it to be. So your definition of art may be completely different from mine, but that is quite all right. Now personally, would I spend that much money on any piece of ‘art’? Probably not. But then, my response could be quite different if I had a billions of dollars to spare.
And thank you for dropping by my blog. You have some great content here on your blog!
Thanks for stopping by and the great comment. I would imagine that some artists could inform us of what the underlying meaning of the Scream is to imply. To fully understand a piece of work one would probably need to understand the period in which the artist was living, the influences on their lives, the world at large of the time, and so forth, all these would have some bearing on the inspiration of the artist. Certainly its about how one perceives the work, we all have different opinions, that’s what makes the world diverse and interesting.
Well, I just want to make a quick note. Art has nothing to do with technical skills. Many great artists were really capable of drawing but the know how itself is just an empty tool. If people think like you than we would consider art just the hyperrealist paintings, which are quite dull for me.
I did an art school, when I was young I used to think this way, but at the end of my studies, when I was able to copy most of the art pieces, i faced it. It’s all about the concept, the composition, the balance of colours and shapes, the elegance not about realism. A painter is definitely not a photographer in my opinion. Just try to sense the emotions…
Certainly art is about drawing out the emotions of the viewer, everybody has different thoughts and opinions hence everybody takes away something different from viewing a work of art, that’s the great thing about it. Thanks for the great comment and visit.
I didn’t have time to read any of the comments, so I may be on one side of the fence or the other but this is my take. I do not see any value in The Scream. I know anyone with any or no talent can take a canvas and a brush and in a couple of hours create a pretty accurate representation of this work.
Today I see galleries full of “new” and fabulously “creative and imaginative” works by people or elephants. Really, where is the art of throwing pain on a canvas? Where is the design? But that’s me. A canvas drop cloth stretched on the frame would at least be evidence that a lot of painting had happened and the drop cloth had done its job of keeping the floor clean.
Also I see many abstracts that have something to say, they provide a feeling, a sense of balance, an idea of sea, or fall leaves, or fire, landscape or a gorgeous balance of color. And many are breathtakingly beautiful.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (and there is no accounting for taste, even my own). Is the motto on my photo blog. Both are things I quickly learned when selling my creations. Whether someone does or doesn’t like my work has nothing to do with me, it is their reaction to the work.
Personally I love the stone and marble statues in your post. I see the art in the gargoyles but they give me the creeps. No thank you, not for me.
Thanks for a great comment. As you said beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Certainly for me art is something that should take time, patience, and dedication to produce.
That is so true and it should apply to pretty much everything we do, no matter what the task at hand is from the janitor to the brick layer, cake decorator, or bridge builder or skyscraper designer. Even one year old kidlets get excited when they stack the blocks two high and that small task” takes them lots of time, patience, and dedication to produce.”
BTW Thnx for the compliment.
Daniel,
Your post question (excellent post BTW) made my mind go in so many directions. As someone who minored in Art HIstory I was always asking myself this very question of what constitutes great art. I have to say that the Mona Lisa was never a favorite of mine (doesn’t appeal to my sensibilities), but I do acknowledge the intricacy and brilliance that went into painting it. Some things that constitute great works of art are rarely disputed such as the Michelangelo, Beethoven’s Fifth (which still moves me to this day) a Rembrandt.
You wonder if The Scream should be put in the same category? I really couldn’t answer this question except to say that the first time I saw “The Scream” it did leave an indelible impression. Although, I get what you are asking. I’ve been to art galleries in which I question why a certain piece is hanging on the wall (such as the painting you saw with the black line). Sometimes I think in the art world (same as the publishing world, photography world, etc,.) it comes down to who you know. Once the right “critic” hails you as the next best “fill in the blank” suddenly everyone is singing your praises. I’m curious as to what you think of Christina’s World by Andrew Wyeth.
As for “The Scream” I don’t know if I would have paid 120 million (ah, to have that kind of money) but I definitely would have paid more than $10 for it : )
Thanks for a great comment, given you have formally studied art then I am certain you know far far more than me about the subject. I have heard from some people who have seen “The Scream” in the flesh as it were, and they too found that it hit a chord.
Just did a search for Christina’s World, and found the wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christina's_World the image on wikipedia is quite small (this link is to a much larger sized image http://0.tqn.com/d/arthistory/1/0/d/r/wyeth_christina.jpg). Seeing the small image on wikipedia I thought it seemed quite flat ! – however seeing the much larger version one can see a great level of detail / time / effort applied to creating the scene. Having said that there isn’t a great deal in the scene from my perspective to capture the imagination. Does remind me a little of Little House on the Prairie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_House_on_the_Prairie_(TV_series)) for some reason! I saw that from wikipedia that it received little attention from critics at the time, but after it was promoted it grew in popularity.
Daniel,
Thanks so much for taking the time to look up Christina’s World! The reason I asked you what you thought of it was because I wanted to know if the girl jumped out at you. The first time I saw that painting ( I didn’t know anything about Andrew Wyeth or this painting) I thought there was something odd about the way she was sitting. Her body seemed contorted and there seemed to me a desperate feeling in trying to get to the house. After reading that the girl in the picture probably had polio I thought that Andrew Wyeth was brilliant for portraying her affliction in such a subtle way (no crutches, wheelchair, etc.,)
You noticed the technicalities of the painting right off the bat (much faster than I did) I noticed the girl and the “air” about her (Perhaps my view of artwork is sometimes too simplistic, but I always notice what is organic first, technicalities second. Sometimes I think what resonates with someone is given how their brain works (right vs. left etc.,) and this is why “The Scream” leaves an impression on so many.
Alrighty, sorry for the long reply. I was an English major ; )
Yes to all. I’m from the school of thinking where everything is art, it all depends on your perspective. One man’s junk is another man’s treasure.
Great blog! It’s art
Thanks for stopping by, art can certainly be found in everything we create. Whether people like it or not is down to their own perceptions and interpretation of the work. All the different thoughts and ideas is what makes the world as we know it.
My sentiments exactly! I was at an exhibition a few years ago where I went from one room filled with classical Italian 15th-17th century paintings on loan from the Vatican to a room of Modern Art- the comparison was striking. I couldn’t help but think that “Paint Splatters on a Wall” should not even be in the same museum as the Italian Masters!
Thanks for a great comment. I am sure many would argue that many an artist could paint something that is photo-realistic, but it requires a far greater creative imagination to create something surreal in which the viewer must imagine what the art actually is – i.e. it is the fact that it makes you wonder – what on earth is that – which really engages one with the work, thereby creating great art !!!!
What about the statue of David by Michelangelo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_%28Michelangelo%29) could one argue that it could have been a far greater sculpture had it been left in a very rough state i.e. just a very vague outline of the human form (i.e. spend a few hours with a sledge hammer / club hammer and knock off some large chunks ) – one would then have to ponder about the significance of the work thereby creating great art.
Daniel, you might like this episode of Slate’s Culture Gabfest podcast-http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/culturegabfest/2012/05/maurice_sendak_art_market_economics_with_felix_salmon_and_the_phenomenon_of_hate_watching_on_slate_s_culture_gabfest.html. The second third of the program they talk about the current economics of the art market.
You might find this http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2010/09/09/the-mona-lisa-curse/ , very interesting as well.
If you’re interested in exploring what makes art art, I recommend the book “Provenance” by Aly Sujo and Laney Salisbury. The book doesn’t answer the question concretely, but offers more to think about. A con artist hired a forger to copy masters’ styles, then passed off the paintings as authentic. (This really happened!) The fact that he duped the experts makes one wonder…who can truly say what is great? If the trained eye can be fooled, does that reveal that we value art more for the name attached to it than for its own beauty? I prefer life-affirming, imaginative works to gritty, “realistic” ones any day. I love John Singer Sargent’s “Carnation, Lily, Lily, Rose.”
wow what a great comment, thanks a lot, that’s a really interesting story about the reproductions. I may just have the take a look at that book when I have a chance over the summer. Just did a search for that painting you suggested (http://www.jssgallery.org/paintings/Carnation_Lily_Lily_Rose.htm) I must say I quite like it myself, nice composition and good attention to detail.
Hello Daniel, I appreciate your post about the value of art. And I also wanted to thank you for stopping by my blog! ~Patricia
Thanks for stopping by and the comment, you certainly have some interesting posts on your blog http://decamvilledesign.wordpress.com