Warning: This is probably a post that is only interesting to me, but perhaps you'll find it interesting enough to read.Claude Monet is the man. Thanks to "The Little Einsteins" and a plethora of galleries and museums around the world, people ranging in age of 4 to 90 can appreciate the many works by Claude Monet. His works are easy to distinguish, they are "dreamy and creamy" (I used this phrase quite often with my art students when talking about Monet), they consist of an incredible palette of colors, and are abstract enough from what the human eye would see that makes people like them. And when I say abstract, I do not mean it in the same categorical way as to the Abstract Expressionism Period (enter Jackson Pollock.) I mean it in the sense of what Impressionism meant to the 1800's. A capture of light, visible dashed brushstrokes, a play on reality in a way that took the art world by complete shock.
Monet's lily pad gardens might in fact be the most recognizable out of all of his series. This painting, "Le bassin aux nympheas" or "Water Lily Pond" was part of 4 paintings produced in 1919 that were all signed, dated and released by Monet himself. During Monet's latter part of his life, his works often went unfinished and many were not dated or signed (most likely since they weren't finished.) Of the other three large-scale water lily pond paintings, one is located in New York City at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, another in a private collection and the third was cut in two before WWII...oooouch!
The reason I'm bringing this up is because of the recent Christie's Auction in June of this year that fetched $80 million dollars for this particular painting! HOLY SMOKES! It's the most expensive piece of art ever sold in Europe (at the London Christie's) and outbid expectations by nearly double the amount. This is where, if I had been telling my students this information, would have gasped and then all heck would break loose in responses such as, "WHAT?! HOW is a work of art worth that much money? He's not even alive!" I always told them that its the dead artists who always make the most money:) Too bad for them. Poor Vincent van Gogh couldn't even sell a single painting during his lifetime, and now his works are collectively worth more than probably a billion dollars. Perhaps its better this way, because once money becomes an issue in an artist's life, things change. It's inevitable. At least we know that van Gogh was doing it for the sake of art and for his love of it.
I'm curious what you think about this aesthetic topic in the art world. Is art overrated, underrated, priceless? I always love what people think about art. That's why I loved teaching it! Anyway, on a side note (if this post wasn't already a huuuuuuge side note from my usual posts) if you are looking for an amazing place to see a vast collection of Monet's work, head to the Art Institute of Chicago. OK, I'm done.
3 comments:
"dreamy and creamy". Nice. I wouldn't have thought of that. :)
I love artwork. I guess I'm a little cheap or lame or whatever, but I think a print is just a lovely as an original. I like paying money for originals to support the artists, but I'd probably be just as happy with a print. I'm so uncultured. :)
Now that's a subject worth a whole semester, no a life time of debate, well next to the subject of "what is art?" Some people buy things for prestige and to show off to people because "they" say it's important. Well, I personally would not spend that kind of money for something unless it guaranteed me a sure ticket into heaven. If an object or work of art could elicit one that much joy that they felt they HAD to have it and could not be satisfied in any other way, go for it! Though, I might schedule an appt. with a psychiatrist while getting the receipt of sale. Though there is something about the original that's wrapped in a whole thread of history and spirit that people find exciting. I have to admit, I love going to an old castle and thinking of the history and the people who may have walked, fought, or did any number of things in. I have seen paintings, sculptures, architecture and heard music that have brought such strong emotion and personal connection that I would love to have it always. Some of my fav.s would be Winged Victory, wow! Stain glass windows in Chartres cathedral, Degas's ballet and horse paintings, Michelangelo's David (he's just hot!)and many more. (This is getting long) This is a tough one because the real thing is a great thing. The textures of the oil strokes, the hard marble, the cool smell of old stone walls, mmmmm...great stuff! This is what museums and passports are for, right?
While I consider myself an appreciator of nearly every genre of art, I wouldn't say I love it enough to pay $80 million, even for an original Monet. I do love impressionist works (I guess that should be capitalized, huh?), though, and maybe someday I'll be able to buy one of Degas' dancer paintings or a Toulouse-Lautrec. I always love the line from "The Breakup": "Never buy a piece of art unless you can't live without it." I think that will be my philosophy down the road when we finally have disposable, I mean, investable income. :) I love this post...it's fun to hear your opinion and wisdom on cultural topics.
Post a Comment