Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
29 Jun 16
07:13
Joined:
Date Joined:
29 Sep 10
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html
Mark Rothko paintings have fetched upto $75 million
Jasper John paintings have fetched upto $110 million
Andy Warhol $105 million
Jackson Pollock $140 million
the article above is from 1995 - it's old news but worth repeating.
they tell you what to like. You can have your opinion... but theirs make the art market.
their opinion is worth billions in the long run.
Art is stock share and not about talent or skill.
Mark Rothko paintings have fetched upto $75 million
Jasper John paintings have fetched upto $110 million
Andy Warhol $105 million
Jackson Pollock $140 million
the article above is from 1995 - it's old news but worth repeating.
they tell you what to like. You can have your opinion... but theirs make the art market.
their opinion is worth billions in the long run.
Art is stock share and not about talent or skill.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 14
|
By:
you have it back to front. America is the richest most powerful and prosperous country, so it can afford to pay huge sums for paintings.
Now exactly how does this tell you what paintigs you might like personally? |
|
By:
go to link ?
CIA sponsored them - created an american art market to counter European art market. usa money was going to Europe. |
|
By:
yes it also sponsored America jazz, and film and music. The simple fact is America was the most talented and creative country and this was used as a policy in the cold war to highlite this and the freedoms enjoyed by American artists.
That did not mean that you had to watch an American film, or listen to its music, or buy its paintings. |
|
By:
the cultural supremacy shifted to America, not because of sponsorship but because they were the most gifted and creative nation.
|
|
By:
I think you should draw your own conclusions from that article.
|
|
By:
CRAP - lfc1971 - READ www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html
Did you skip this step ?????? IT IS TAUGHT IN THE ART SCHOOLS - WRITE A LETTER TO GOLDSMITHS. |
|
By:
zorrostrikes
The American CIA decided to promote American artists, and music, and films etc to highlight its cultural superority over Soviet Russia. Now why would it not wish to feature its most talented people, i don`t know what exactly you are trying to say. It dosn`t make much sense. |
|
By:
you do recall the velvet revolution? and Vaclav Havels love of the Velver Underground
|
|
By:
not even you, no matter how biased, could say that thet did not produce great and beautiful music..and yes they were American also, and modern, and avant garde...and of course famously promoted by Andy Warhol.
|
|
By:
so what point were you trying to make again?
|
|
By:
you see they could hear the music drifting over the Berlin wall....and when the notes stopped everything went back to normal
 |
|
By:
the point is... they created them.
they bought their art work, pushed up their prices. made a false market. created a want based on money value only. if you look at a lyle antique guide they tell you that a singer sewing machine is worth say £100. because someone at some stage paid a £100 for one. therefore all future singer sewing machines should get £100? thats what the CIA did. They established a market. Partly to thwart the Ruskies. but also to take away the dominance of the European art market. this was after the war. All painting collections were Europe based. The nazis were stealing art. All the valuable 'art stocks ' (a painting worth that much is a stock) were European. Why should all the dollars just float away to europe? so they buy their own art stocks, creating a market. (the andy warhol factory). the USA is mega talented like you say - but they had no influence in the art markets in the i950's. a few years ago Charles Saatchi dumped all his paintings of one artist he had onto the market. All the paintings of that artist lost their value overnight. It's value is only that we give it value - it's about confidence. Are these paintings really worth multi millions... http://www.whudat.de/top-20-most-expensive-paintings-in-the-world/ art stocks. if i have 10 johnny smiths and sell one for a million at sotherby's - buy using my own proxy. does that mean i can sell the rest for ten million. |
|
By:
"art stocks. if i have 10 johnny smiths and sell one for a million at sotherby's - buy using my own proxy. does that mean i can sell the rest for ten million".
Zorro, you'll need two of you  . For a million hammer, you'll need at 950k underbidder. Have you thought this through |
|
By:
how many in your family?
of course the cia have more than one employee? |