Quote:
Originally Posted by ceptimus
Where it breaks down is that it is quite possible to fake these works of art - the experts are fooled on occasion and, of course, we only find out on those occasions when they find out that they've been fooled. How many fakes are hanging in collections and galleries that have gone undetected (so far)?
|
Would pretentious collectors of non-representational art still pay good money for the pieces if they knew these had actually been produced by chimpanzees? Oh,
wait...
"Congo (1954–1964) was a chimpanzee who learned how to draw and paint. Zoologist and surrealist painter Desmond Morris first observed his abilities when the chimp was offered a pencil and paper at two years of age. By the age of four, Congo had made 400 drawings and paintings. His style has been described as 'lyrical abstract impressionism'."
Congo (chimpanzee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
"Three paintings by a chimpanzee named Congo sold at auction in London Monday for about $25,000 -- after having been expected to fetch less than $2,000. The winning bidder was Howard Hong of Pasadena, Calif.
No Chump Change for Chimp Art : NPR
Here's one of those three paintings:
One of Congo's paintings currently
available for purchase:
Title: Painting with bold circular loop on red paper
Work date: 1958
Price: £4,000
The style is claimed by the Mayor Gallery to be "Modernism (ca. 1880-1945)"
You know, I'd rather have these than many non-representational works by human artists. Think of all the fun that could be had showing these off to certain would-be sophisticates and, after enough fawning on their part, mentioning that the artist is a chimp. They just
might not all be as happy about it as Howard Hong.
And some of this chimp's works are actually nicer to look at than are many non-representational works by humans...
