Duct-taped banana artwork sells for $6.2m in NYC

[Sid Bishop]

Maurizio Cattelan's provocative artwork of a banana duct-taped to a wall has fetched $6.2m (£4.9m) at Sotheby's in New York - four times higher than pre-sale estimates. The auction house says Chinese cryptocurrency entrepreneur Justin Sun outbid six other rivals to get the "Comedian" installation of the Italian visual artist on Wednesday. "In the coming days, I will personally eat the banana as part of this unique artistic experience," Mr Sun was quoted as saying. The taped banana - now perhaps one of the most expensive fruits ever sold - was actually bought earlier in the day for a mere $0.35, according to the New York Times.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy87202v43no

[CEB2ElectricBoogaloo]

The banana isn’t the artwork. The discourse around it is the artwork, such as it is. Much like Dohnut discussing politics, if you just ignore it, it becomes clear that it’s an utter irrelevance

[Sid Bishop]

The banana isn’t the artwork. The discourse around it is the artwork, such as it is. Much like Dohnut discussing politics, if you just ignore it, it becomes clear that it’s an utter irrelevance

On the video it just shows a banana duct taped onto a plainly painted wall ?
Hope that you can find a similar way to come up with an idea to sell your artwork for a big price like this !

[Chicken Dhansak]

CEB, if you threw an egg at a white wall could you get millions of pounds for it?

[Sid Bishop]

CEB, if you threw an egg at a white wall could you get millions of pounds for it?

What a good idea !

Also'....Tracey Emin's Bed is sold at auction for over £2.5m
Hundreds pack Christie's auction house in central London for sale of 1998 installation that documents relationship breakdown
Hannah Ellis-Petersen. Tracey Emin's installation, My Bed, which documents the artist's traumatic relationship breakdown, sold for £2.54m at Christie's auction on Tuesday. One of Britain's most famous and polarising pieces of modern art, My Bed was made in Emin's Waterloo council flat in 1998. Referred to by the artist as an unconventional and uncompromising self-portrait though objects, it features the artist's own bed covered in stained sheets, discarded condoms, blood-stained underwear and empty bottles of alcohol.

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesig ... %20Tuesday.

[CEB2ElectricBoogaloo]

The banana isn’t the artwork. The discourse around it is the artwork, such as it is. Much like Dohnut discussing politics, if you just ignore it, it becomes clear that it’s an utter irrelevance

On the video it just shows a banana duct taped onto a plainly painted wall ?
Hope that you can find a similar way to come up with an idea to sell your artwork for a big price like this !

Intrigued as to what point you think you’ve made there.

[Max B Gold]

The banana isn’t the artwork. The discourse around it is the artwork, such as it is. Much like Dohnut discussing politics, if you just ignore it, it becomes clear that it’s an utter irrelevance

On the video it just shows a banana duct taped onto a plainly painted wall ?
Hope that you can find a similar way to come up with an idea to sell your artwork for a big price like this !

Intrigued as to what point you think you’ve made there.

He's probably thinking you could do something similar and ground breaking by taping the severed penis of a transwoman wrapped in a Harry Potter scarf to portrait of Katie Perry.

[CEB2ElectricBoogaloo]

sigh

[The Mindsweep]

The cost is far less than the UK lost when it voted to leave the EU due to its banana size rule

[Pugwash]

The banana isn’t the artwork. The discourse around it is the artwork, such as it is. Much like Dohnut discussing politics, if you just ignore it, it becomes clear that it’s an utter irrelevance

On the video it just shows a banana duct taped onto a plainly painted wall ?
Hope that you can find a similar way to come up with an idea to sell your artwork for a big price like this !

Intrigued as to what point you think you’ve made there.

That he has no clue what art is? Can't say I do to be honest , other than it's all about interpretation.

[CEB2ElectricBoogaloo]

Basically the point is that the high end art world is a racket, and that things such as this exist only as a handy way of storing money. The narrative around such artworks is useful not in what it says about art or about the world, but about simply presenting a plausible context for such transactions to work.

Thats why there’s no actual spectrum of value of art work like this. It’s not like some people are selling comparable works for a tenner, some for a hundred quid, some for a grand, some for ten grand, some for a hundred grand.

It basically doesn’t exist in the same world as “art” as creativity

[Max B Gold]

Basically the point is that the high end art world is a racket, and that things such as this exist only as a handy way of storing money. The narrative around such artworks is useful not in what it says about art or about the world, but about simply presenting a plausible context for such transactions to work.

Thats why there’s no actual spectrum of value of art work like this. It’s not like some people are selling comparable works for a tenner, some for a hundred quid, some for a grand, some for ten grand, some for a hundred grand.

It basically doesn’t exist in the same world as “art” as creativity

It's also a mechanism for converting crypto (intangible asset)into a tangible asset like the geezer who bought the banana did. Except he says he's going to eat the banana so he won't be storing money, as I doubt the duct tape is worth much on its own.

[CEB2ElectricBoogaloo]

Basically the point is that the high end art world is a racket, and that things such as this exist only as a handy way of storing money. The narrative around such artworks is useful not in what it says about art or about the world, but about simply presenting a plausible context for such transactions to work.

Thats why there’s no actual spectrum of value of art work like this. It’s not like some people are selling comparable works for a tenner, some for a hundred quid, some for a grand, some for ten grand, some for a hundred grand.

It basically doesn’t exist in the same world as “art” as creativity

It's also a mechanism for converting crypto (intangible asset)into a tangible asset like the geezer who bought the banana did. Except he says he's going to eat the banana so he won't be storing money, as I doubt the duct tape is worth much on its own.

You’re correct, however the banana itself isn’t the artwork (and the act of eating it is itself an inherent part of this particular “artwork’s” concept); the piece comes with detailed instructions on replacing the banana and the tape.
It’s essentially a physical NFT, the “owner” has purchased the right to claim he owns it.

[Max B Gold]

Basically the point is that the high end art world is a racket, and that things such as this exist only as a handy way of storing money. The narrative around such artworks is useful not in what it says about art or about the world, but about simply presenting a plausible context for such transactions to work.

Thats why there’s no actual spectrum of value of art work like this. It’s not like some people are selling comparable works for a tenner, some for a hundred quid, some for a grand, some for ten grand, some for a hundred grand.

It basically doesn’t exist in the same world as “art” as creativity

It's also a mechanism for converting crypto (intangible asset)into a tangible asset like the geezer who bought the banana did. Except he says he's going to eat the banana so he won't be storing money, as I doubt the duct tape is worth much on its own.

You’re correct, however the banana itself isn’t the artwork (and the act of eating it is itself an inherent part of this particular “artwork’s” concept); the piece comes with detailed instructions on replacing the banana and the tape.
It’s essentially a physical NFT, the “owner” has purchased the right to claim he owns it.

Blimming hell this is worse than the money trick.

[Bandy Legs]

Basically the point is that the high end art world is a racket, and that things such as this exist only as a handy way of storing money. The narrative around such artworks is useful not in what it says about art or about the world, but about simply presenting a plausible context for such transactions to work.

Thats why there’s no actual spectrum of value of art work like this. It’s not like some people are selling comparable works for a tenner, some for a hundred quid, some for a grand, some for ten grand, some for a hundred grand.

It basically doesn’t exist in the same world as “art” as creativity

Which all comes down to interpretation.
What is Art?
Again no real knowledge other than a friend who bought "Art" & his take on it. The What is Art bit.

[CEB2ElectricBoogaloo]

The question “what is art?” isn’t something I’m particularly interested in - I don’t mean that to be dismissive of your point, just that I think that the people valuing and paying for stuff like this are not actually interested in artistic merit or deep questions about what it is to be creative, so I don’t think things like this are worth the analysis.

Then there’s the sort of grey area where you have artists like Tracy Emin (who I personally think is a lot more interesting than Damien Hirst) where there is to my mind clearly some mad creative brain at work, and where she also was savvy enough to exploit the art market the right way.
In that sense, art - in terms of modern art that’s highly sought after - is more about what you can get away with calling art while getting the attention of those who can market it.

To me it’s a completely different world, and if I ever describe myself as an “artist” it’s only in the sense that I think drawing/painting is an art form, not as an attempt to place myself in any sort of context within the “art world”. More like a community of people who are interested in making work within a certain discipline.

I’m a bit disillusioned at the moment anyway, finding the emergence of AI image generation to be profoundly depressing. At least until I actually draw, then I remember why I like it

[StillSpike]

Basically the point is that the high end art world is a racket, and that things such as this exist only as a handy way of storing money. The narrative around such artworks is useful not in what it says about art or about the world, but about simply presenting a plausible context for such transactions to work.

Thats why there’s no actual spectrum of value of art work like this. It’s not like some people are selling comparable works for a tenner, some for a hundred quid, some for a grand, some for ten grand, some for a hundred grand.

It basically doesn’t exist in the same world as “art” as creativity

It's also a mechanism for converting crypto (intangible asset)into a tangible asset like the geezer who bought the banana did. Except he says he's going to eat the banana so he won't be storing money, as I doubt the duct tape is worth much on its own.

You’re correct, however the banana itself isn’t the artwork (and the act of eating it is itself an inherent part of this particular “artwork’s” concept); the piece comes with detailed instructions on replacing the banana and the tape.
It’s essentially a physical NFT, the “owner” has purchased the right to claim he owns it.

So if some oligarch paid a master criminal to nick the banana and duct-tape "piece" from the current owner - I wonder if it would immediately lose its value, or would it be enhanced due to the story gaining another chapter? Or would be current owner just be able to use a new banana?

I wonder.

[EliotNes]

People are dying of starvation and a guy with more money than he knows what to do with buys a banana for USD 6.2M just to get one over on his peers. How many starving people could USD 6.2M feed for years. I am lost for words to describe this - I'll start with one word - idiot.

[Bandy Legs]

The question “what is art?” isn’t something I’m particularly interested in - I don’t mean that to be dismissive of your point, just that I think that the people valuing and paying for stuff like this are not actually interested in artistic merit or deep questions about what it is to be creative, so I don’t think things like this are worth the analysis.

Then there’s the sort of grey area where you have artists like Tracy Emin (who I personally think is a lot more interesting than Damien Hirst) where there is to my mind clearly some mad creative brain at work, and where she also was savvy enough to exploit the art market the right way.
In that sense, art - in terms of modern art that’s highly sought after - is more about what you can get away with calling art while getting the attention of those who can market it.

To me it’s a completely different world, and if I ever describe myself as an “artist” it’s only in the sense that I think drawing/painting is an art form, not as an attempt to place myself in any sort of context within the “art world”. More like a community of people who are interested in making work within a certain discipline.

I’m a bit disillusioned at the moment anyway, finding the emergence of AI image generation to be profoundly depressing. At least until I actually draw, then I remember why I like it

I kind of agree, His what is art thing is based on investment only. He only asks the question to the likes of me. I've decided a lot of it is cr@p & he chuckles.
One man's rubbish is another man's gold is another one of his art sayings. I've seen the money he makes off it & I agree with that saying.

It's all way above me, I wouldn't know a piece of art from a rubbish tip.

I think that's what he means the what is art comment to me means, when others say it £ signs light up his eyes.

[CEB2ElectricBoogaloo]

It's also a mechanism for converting crypto (intangible asset)into a tangible asset like the geezer who bought the banana did. Except he says he's going to eat the banana so he won't be storing money, as I doubt the duct tape is worth much on its own.

You’re correct, however the banana itself isn’t the artwork (and the act of eating it is itself an inherent part of this particular “artwork’s” concept); the piece comes with detailed instructions on replacing the banana and the tape.
It’s essentially a physical NFT, the “owner” has purchased the right to claim he owns it.

So if some oligarch paid a master criminal to nick the banana and duct-tape "piece" from the current owner - I wonder if it would immediately lose its value, or would it be enhanced due to the story gaining another chapter? Or would be current owner just be able to use a new banana?

I wonder.

That’s the thing - and what I mean by it being the equivalent of an NFT - a master criminal could not steal it because the physical object is not the artwork, the artwork is the concept, and that can’t be stolen.

[Omygawd]

People are dying of starvation and a guy with more money than he knows what to do with buys a banana for USD 6.2M just to get one over on his peers. How many starving people could USD 6.2M feed for years. I am lost for words to describe this - I'll start with one word - idiot.

I’ll accept your word and offer fu**wit as an alternative.

[StillSpike]

You’re correct, however the banana itself isn’t the artwork (and the act of eating it is itself an inherent part of this particular “artwork’s” concept); the piece comes with detailed instructions on replacing the banana and the tape.
It’s essentially a physical NFT, the “owner” has purchased the right to claim he owns it.

So if some oligarch paid a master criminal to nick the banana and duct-tape "piece" from the current owner - I wonder if it would immediately lose its value, or would it be enhanced due to the story gaining another chapter? Or would be current owner just be able to use a new banana?

I wonder.

That’s the thing - and what I mean by it being the equivalent of an NFT - a master criminal could not steal it because the physical object is not the artwork, the artwork is the concept, and that can’t be stolen.

Yeah - that's what I meant by it would lose its value immediately. Even if the oligarch got the piece and hid it in his vault so only he could gloat over it, all it would do is stink up the vault. Joke's on him.

[Sid Bishop]

People are dying of starvation and a guy with more money than he knows what to do with buys a banana for USD 6.2M just to get one over on his peers. How many starving people could USD 6.2M feed for years. I am lost for words to describe this - I'll start with one word - idiot.

Who would have wanted to buy this same ''Duct-taped banana artwork'' if an unknown artist had created it ?
It would most likely have been made fun of and branded as worthless.
It all rather smacks of the folktake "The Emperor's New Clothes" by the Danish author Hans Christian Andersen about a vain emperor whose folly gets exposed before his subjects.

[Max B Gold]

On the subject of bananas.

Do youse know they pick them unripe and treat them with chemicals to halt the ripening process and ship them to the UK and then put them in big warehouses and treat them with more chemicals to restart the ripening process. I only know this because I once assisted a client who wanted to claim various tax allowances for his buildings, machinery etc.

So what looks a fresh fruit that is marketed as being a healthy eat has been subjected to two chemical processes. Now dont even get me started on the United Fruit Company & The CIA and what they did to secure the banana trade.

I have no knowledge of Duct tape other than its very useful for sticking stuff together but its probably riddled with chemicals.