Sorry, I Just Don't Get It.
- Thread starter seacaptain
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
That's not fair!!! That only about 20 cents a year. Like getting 5 pounds of the P word for $3.00! And you enjoy coffee out of it, too!
Great post, a/c.
Great post, a/c.
daimyo:
daimyo:
If you get his newsletter, you can read Maxim Engel write a great many words about how fickle the high end pipe market is. How the Chinese refuse to buy locally made pipes, how some years pipes from one country are all the rage and other years the same pipes won't budge from his shelves.
The comparison between 20 million dollar paintings and high end pipes may not actually be all that far off. It's a more widespread model for sure, one person buying one artist's painting for 20 million dollars will forever send the prices of everything that person does into the stratosphere. The same principles apply in that some makers get valued more highly than others based simply on the whims of "the market", and if you can tell me (or more importantly Maxim) why it ignores some people and not others, I'm sure that information would be worth a lot of money.
I'll reiterate, there's no questioning the quality of the pipes or the pipemakers, but how some become so consistently sought after is a great mystery.
You illustrate my point perfectly. What about a painting makes it worth 20 million dollars when millions of other artists are producing work of no lesser quality?
daimyo:
"Keeping up with the Joneses" is ludicrous behaviour for sure, but I'm not so sure what to think of the suggestion that a certain segment of the population is immune to it.
If you get his newsletter, you can read Maxim Engel write a great many words about how fickle the high end pipe market is. How the Chinese refuse to buy locally made pipes, how some years pipes from one country are all the rage and other years the same pipes won't budge from his shelves.
The comparison between 20 million dollar paintings and high end pipes may not actually be all that far off. It's a more widespread model for sure, one person buying one artist's painting for 20 million dollars will forever send the prices of everything that person does into the stratosphere. The same principles apply in that some makers get valued more highly than others based simply on the whims of "the market", and if you can tell me (or more importantly Maxim) why it ignores some people and not others, I'm sure that information would be worth a lot of money.
I'll reiterate, there's no questioning the quality of the pipes or the pipemakers, but how some become so consistently sought after is a great mystery.
It's really not a mystery. Supply and demand. Mystique and marketing, quality and acceptance create factors that may not be readily groked, but affect the demand.
frozenchurchwar
den: It's easy! Art appreciation is mostly visceral, paid critics, students and professors aside. If you are not capable of experiencing or, will not let yourself experience, a deeply seated, purely spontaneous reaction to anything you will most likely not enjoy art. I'm not speaking to trying to enjoy something because others do. I'm addressing a gut deep reaction to what you perceive as beauty. Some people are simply incapable of enjoying anything for the sheer joy of the experience because they keep their emotions on too tight a rein. One doesn't even have to understand a painting to have a reaction to the colors, the design, or technique. One look and you are struck by the beauty which you may or may not be able to explain. And, to try and explain would simply take away from the experience
The old adage " . . . eye of the beholder" is more than a maxim, it is a stark truth. Who likes what is indeed a wonderful mystery. If it could be explained the joy would diminish.
den: It's easy! Art appreciation is mostly visceral, paid critics, students and professors aside. If you are not capable of experiencing or, will not let yourself experience, a deeply seated, purely spontaneous reaction to anything you will most likely not enjoy art. I'm not speaking to trying to enjoy something because others do. I'm addressing a gut deep reaction to what you perceive as beauty. Some people are simply incapable of enjoying anything for the sheer joy of the experience because they keep their emotions on too tight a rein. One doesn't even have to understand a painting to have a reaction to the colors, the design, or technique. One look and you are struck by the beauty which you may or may not be able to explain. And, to try and explain would simply take away from the experience
The old adage " . . . eye of the beholder" is more than a maxim, it is a stark truth. Who likes what is indeed a wonderful mystery. If it could be explained the joy would diminish.
Not my style, but it's not by pipe. Don't ever come between a man and his smoking. Some would say meerschaums are a little funny looking too, but its all in the taste. We all need a little whimsy. It's definately not a pipe you would see on Joe Blow Citizen's pipe rack. Cool Piece.
Interesting that the thread has taken a turn to discuss the merits of art, which the pipe certainly represents.
I'll take a moment to also say that I don't "get" a lot of what passes for art nowadays. Some of it is literally no better than children's finger painting, yet people will pay big bucks for it.
I think a lot of it is the emperor-has-no-clothes syndrome. Only "sophisticated" people understand it, and everyone wants to be sophisticated.
I'll take a moment to also say that I don't "get" a lot of what passes for art nowadays. Some of it is literally no better than children's finger painting, yet people will pay big bucks for it.
I think a lot of it is the emperor-has-no-clothes syndrome. Only "sophisticated" people understand it, and everyone wants to be sophisticated.
Well its definitely not for me... but as the old adage states. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"
I have found in my very short 46 years if being on this rock, that there so many different type of people, there is literally something for everyone.
Art is so subjective, I have seen art shows with some the silliest things being displayed, that at first glance I say what the hell is this shit!... but then I realize, who the hell am I to dismiss someone else's "art", they've put themselves out there with what they've created.. what am I doing to put something out there, yup its so much easier to talk shit that to get up and do things.
Whomever made that pipe, well more power to you, to whomever buys that, well more power to you as well. Either way it will hold no bearance on my life
I have found in my very short 46 years if being on this rock, that there so many different type of people, there is literally something for everyone.
Art is so subjective, I have seen art shows with some the silliest things being displayed, that at first glance I say what the hell is this shit!... but then I realize, who the hell am I to dismiss someone else's "art", they've put themselves out there with what they've created.. what am I doing to put something out there, yup its so much easier to talk shit that to get up and do things.
Whomever made that pipe, well more power to you, to whomever buys that, well more power to you as well. Either way it will hold no bearance on my life
If someone gifted me the second pipe in jkrug's post, I'd be grateful. I'd then have a shadow box built and hang it on a wall.
Hey, to me, it is ART! A pipe, not so much for smoking. But that's just me. YMMV. In fact, I guarantee it.
Hey, to me, it is ART! A pipe, not so much for smoking. But that's just me. YMMV. In fact, I guarantee it.
Here ya go...
“Onement VI” from abstract expressionist painter Barnett Newman sold on Tuesday, May 14, 2013 at a Sotheby’s auction for a record-setting 43.8 million dollars. Simply a canvas painted blue with a white line running down the middle.
Of course this painting should not be confused with one of his earlier works called ‘Cathedra”.
As one private dealer at the auction remarked, “I guess a million dollars doesn’t buy you much anymore”. As for what ‘art’ is, it seems to me that if you choose to call something art, then its art. Personally I think it’s ludicrous, but that’s just simply my opinion and I’m welcome to it. I’m of course referring to the paintings and not the pipe. As for the pipe, definitely not for me by any stretch of the imagination, but again... my opinion. :wink:
“Onement VI” from abstract expressionist painter Barnett Newman sold on Tuesday, May 14, 2013 at a Sotheby’s auction for a record-setting 43.8 million dollars. Simply a canvas painted blue with a white line running down the middle.
Of course this painting should not be confused with one of his earlier works called ‘Cathedra”.
As one private dealer at the auction remarked, “I guess a million dollars doesn’t buy you much anymore”. As for what ‘art’ is, it seems to me that if you choose to call something art, then its art. Personally I think it’s ludicrous, but that’s just simply my opinion and I’m welcome to it. I’m of course referring to the paintings and not the pipe. As for the pipe, definitely not for me by any stretch of the imagination, but again... my opinion. :wink:
The later painting is much better than the earlier one!! Notice how blue it is.........
Now, if I were a Sillycone dot.com'er with $3 billion in my pocket, I might just buy a few of these (though old school stuff, where there's actually a recognizable subject- some impressionists might be nice, or a Munch or hey, a Rembrandt.). I mean, with that dough, whats' $100 million in order to impress my pals?
Now, if I were a Sillycone dot.com'er with $3 billion in my pocket, I might just buy a few of these (though old school stuff, where there's actually a recognizable subject- some impressionists might be nice, or a Munch or hey, a Rembrandt.). I mean, with that dough, whats' $100 million in order to impress my pals?
Perfect example of the emperor-has-no-clothes syndrome.
I bet no one, and I mean not one of that guy's friends or family called him an idiot for spending 44 million dollars on a canvas painted blue.
I bet no one, and I mean not one of that guy's friends or family called him an idiot for spending 44 million dollars on a canvas painted blue.
It's not merely a canvas painted blue! It clearly has a vertical white stripe, representing 99% of the value of the piece. I mean, anyone could just paint a canvas blue and call it art.
Dave has got me beat in the art appreciation department. I do not understand Jackson Pollack's work, and I truly don't understand the whole Abstract Expression thing. That's not to say there are not some abstract pieces that are enjoyable to look at; I just don't have an appreciation for them on any deep level. I don't know what kind of money Pollack was selling his works for when he was alive. I say if you can sell what appears to my uneducated eye to be a housepainter's well-used drop cloth for a good amount of money, good for you. I bet it beats the hell out of punching a clock every day.
Dave has got me beat in the art appreciation department. I do not understand Jackson Pollack's work, and I truly don't understand the whole Abstract Expression thing. That's not to say there are not some abstract pieces that are enjoyable to look at; I just don't have an appreciation for them on any deep level. I don't know what kind of money Pollack was selling his works for when he was alive. I say if you can sell what appears to my uneducated eye to be a housepainter's well-used drop cloth for a good amount of money, good for you. I bet it beats the hell out of punching a clock every day.
Many of the most expensive works have value because of historical significance. 99.9999999999% of all art is sold for next to nothing. In fact, I know of several instances where Warhol's Campbell Soup Can paintings have sold for under $100.
The Pollock painting was sold for that much because it is in almost every art history and history book made. You can find many Picasso paintings and hand pulled prints for under $100. There is more to the value of art than just name and style. And, the monetary value and the aesthetic value are not tied together at all. Besides in these times of digital and internet based communications, you will most likely see a true death of the fine arts. Name one artist of any merit aesthetically that has come along in the last ten years? They are all dissolved into obscure philosophy and such. Sure, there are decorative arts. Couch art. But, I think the real revolution is in the world of crafts.
We already have a growing interest in handmade. People are interested in how their things were made verses what you get for your buck. Luxury is moving from perceived value to rarity. Diamonds aren't even as rare as something made with old world techniques. I see handmade books, knives, "things" getting the top end dollar over diamonds and gold. There are way more diamonds than things being made with the old techniques.
Just look at the world of pipemaking.
Just my 2cents
It's silly to beat the dead horse of the "prices of art", when the world has moved on to more interesting things.
The Pollock painting was sold for that much because it is in almost every art history and history book made. You can find many Picasso paintings and hand pulled prints for under $100. There is more to the value of art than just name and style. And, the monetary value and the aesthetic value are not tied together at all. Besides in these times of digital and internet based communications, you will most likely see a true death of the fine arts. Name one artist of any merit aesthetically that has come along in the last ten years? They are all dissolved into obscure philosophy and such. Sure, there are decorative arts. Couch art. But, I think the real revolution is in the world of crafts.
We already have a growing interest in handmade. People are interested in how their things were made verses what you get for your buck. Luxury is moving from perceived value to rarity. Diamonds aren't even as rare as something made with old world techniques. I see handmade books, knives, "things" getting the top end dollar over diamonds and gold. There are way more diamonds than things being made with the old techniques.
Just look at the world of pipemaking.
Just my 2cents
It's silly to beat the dead horse of the "prices of art", when the world has moved on to more interesting things.
...and usually things like the Pollock were bought by foundations, with the representative or attorney getting credit for the final bid. However, the foundation usually just attributes the work to a MUSEUM after the bill is paid.
This is a really interesting thread. I'm at work so I can't give the required attention to a response merited by the topic.
So instead I'll just be an agitator and leave this here.
"Fountain" by Marcel Duchamp
The original was lost but an 'authentic replica' sold at auction for $1,762,500. Heck, several artists have made performance art pieces by illegally and publicly urinating on various replicas held in museums.
I don't mean to undermine the piece, it is highly touted as the most important piece of 20th Century Art.
I only submit this as to say that art often is about its context as much as it is about its physical manifestation.
How does this relate to Mummert's work? I've got to spend more time than a 15 minute coffee break to decide!
So instead I'll just be an agitator and leave this here.
"Fountain" by Marcel Duchamp
The original was lost but an 'authentic replica' sold at auction for $1,762,500. Heck, several artists have made performance art pieces by illegally and publicly urinating on various replicas held in museums.
Paul Ingram
I don't mean to undermine the piece, it is highly touted as the most important piece of 20th Century Art.
I only submit this as to say that art often is about its context as much as it is about its physical manifestation.
How does this relate to Mummert's work? I've got to spend more time than a 15 minute coffee break to decide!
Art exists, I think, to evoke (maybe even provoke) a reaction in and by the person consuming (that is: seeing, tasting, feeling, hearing) it.
SO I haven't any trouble considering the pipe in the OP to be art. It's just not art I'd own.
I'd submit, too, that beauty and merit in a pipe requires something more. A pipe, while it certainly can should be art, is also a tool -- it is an object with a job to do. The most beautiful pipe-shape object in the world, if it didn't have a draft hole or bowl, would not be a "pipe." To me, a difference, then, between a pipe and an objet d'art, is that a pipe must function -- and function very well -- to be considered excellent -- whatever it looks like.
SO I haven't any trouble considering the pipe in the OP to be art. It's just not art I'd own.
I'd submit, too, that beauty and merit in a pipe requires something more. A pipe, while it certainly can should be art, is also a tool -- it is an object with a job to do. The most beautiful pipe-shape object in the world, if it didn't have a draft hole or bowl, would not be a "pipe." To me, a difference, then, between a pipe and an objet d'art, is that a pipe must function -- and function very well -- to be considered excellent -- whatever it looks like.
- Status