re: “ Good Times” painting sells for $15.2M, more than the Monet up for bid

quote:

---

I do not get art..

---

As the old saying goes, "beauty is in the eye of the beholdere" ("beer holder" jokes aside).

What one considers "good" art is highly subjective. I fricking loathe Picasos.



I dislike them because I find them to be "junk" paintings, something akin to what any child could scrawl. I fricking loathe them because I'm told they are magnificent pieces and that I should be impressed by them.

Monets are okay, just a bit too blurry to me. I like my art more crisp and Monets seem like someone with a really good eye but giant hands with poor motor control is just learning to capture depth and positional relationships.

Van Goghs are a better version of Monets, to me.

I much prefer the detail of the Baroque/Renaissance artists (Carravagio, Ruebens, Pousin, etc. / Michealangelo, Da Vinci, Botticelli, etc.)

quote:

---

But I do like the blue dog paintings…

---

Not me. It's a blue dog with yellow eyes that seem to want to devour your soul. I've never understood the fascination.

But then, that's art.

Check out the lower left hand corner of that painting. Someone gettin AIDS.

How much did the poker playing dogs go for?

quote:

---

Who would want that?

---

Either a white liberal or an Afro-American studies professor.

The worst one I ever saw was from Turner.

It looked like someone's grandson kicked over a can of blue paint on a voting precinct map.

That is 5 - 7 Chick-fil-a franchises worth

I think a spicy chicken sandwich meal > impressionism and pointalism combined.

Renaissance that!

I remember this picture from our social studies book back in the 90s. Think it was the Harlem Renaissance pages

quote:

---

Monets are okay, just a bit too blurry to me. I 

---

Morty Seinfeld, is that you?

Bill Perkins is a legend, hell of a poker player too