Well yes, they have a lot in them. They have historic importance, they portray a period of human thinking, they portray a part of the artist soul, and they have a different meaning for every buyer.
Just today I was talking with some friends how about 20 years ago my dad refused to buy me a painting by Gustave Klimt, because it would not acquire any value in the future, and it would be a bad investment for $7000; A few weeks ago that very same picture was sold for $135,000,000.00; if you think that they have nothing in them, perhaps you should ask anybody buying art, why do they buy it, and any artist why does he do it.
2006-09-08 15:02:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by Pablo 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
Yes they do - they are original, and that´s what you are paying for: the imagination of the author. If you like a particular piece or not that's a different story - I may hate what you love and vice-versa.
2006-09-07 18:18:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by ptblueghost64 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Pretentious snobbery in the art culture has a lot to do with the overrated, subjective creations.
2006-09-07 18:14:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by Regina D 2
·
4⤊
1⤋
Somtimes nothing can say a whole lot more than alot of something.
2006-09-07 18:10:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Which 'they' are you talking about?
Are you suggesting a Dali, a Picasso, a Hockney have no substance?
2006-09-07 19:01:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Doc Watson 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Just because you don't appreciate contemporary art, doesn't mean everyone else is the same.
2006-09-07 18:33:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by michinoku2001 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
You might want to add a link so we can understand what you mean
2006-09-07 18:09:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm sorry I don't know about this
2016-09-19 14:16:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Would like to know more about this too
2016-08-08 14:31:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
u pay more 4 something u dont understand.
2006-09-07 18:09:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by hsarora47 4
·
3⤊
0⤋