Is Kate Moss an artist? Of course she is, all the tabloids and free rags shout. She is 'it' - the golden girl that everyone wants to feel connected to.
Oh, isn't it scandalous that that picture she drew only sold for £33,600 at auction last Saturday? I mean, come on, it was a self-portrait with her own lipstick and... Pete Doherty's blood! Expected to fetch £40,000 - peanuts! I would have bought it for half a million! (If I was made of money, at least).
The title of Kate's masterpiece alone is a piece of art 'Who Needs Blood When You've Got Lipstick'. Yeah, what if we all had lipstick in our veins - no one would ever bleed to death again. And everyone's lips would be lovely and red the whole time. Wow! Or maybe she's talking about Pete's blood. Like: 'Pete, you're a wanker! I've got the best lipstick in the world!' Look, I can draw with it. 'Wow, Kate, that's wicked!'
But you gotta feel for Kate, dontchya? She must have been looking at Hirst's auction and thinking - I don't need a dead cow, I've got Pete's blood and my lipstick. Up your's Hirst! I should be the most expensive living artist in the world, not you!
But at least, Banksy's work took a bashing at the auction too. Really, though, what could he expect? He refused to authenticate the authenticity of his authorship. 'Yeah, bollocks, art world I don't care if you poncy pricks don't buy my work? It's not mine.' How cool and postmodern. No worries that his mural on the side of a van 'Fungle Junk' only went for half the expected £150,000?
So Hirst sold some of his work for £111 million on 15 September. Not bad. All those animals and formaldehyde must cost a bit anyway.
It is surely a step forward for civilisation that top artist's these days don't have to die in poverty and disgrace before they achieve fame and certain players start selling their works for heaps of cash. If only Van Gogh had pickled his own ear in a jar and set up his own auction instead of descending into madness and eating his own paint. But then the art world, now, would be light years ahead of its time. Hirst would be a drunken farmer and Kate would be a checkout assistant. And today's artists would be conducting the world economy!
Oh, isn't it scandalous that that picture she drew only sold for £33,600 at auction last Saturday? I mean, come on, it was a self-portrait with her own lipstick and... Pete Doherty's blood! Expected to fetch £40,000 - peanuts! I would have bought it for half a million! (If I was made of money, at least).
The title of Kate's masterpiece alone is a piece of art 'Who Needs Blood When You've Got Lipstick'. Yeah, what if we all had lipstick in our veins - no one would ever bleed to death again. And everyone's lips would be lovely and red the whole time. Wow! Or maybe she's talking about Pete's blood. Like: 'Pete, you're a wanker! I've got the best lipstick in the world!' Look, I can draw with it. 'Wow, Kate, that's wicked!'
But you gotta feel for Kate, dontchya? She must have been looking at Hirst's auction and thinking - I don't need a dead cow, I've got Pete's blood and my lipstick. Up your's Hirst! I should be the most expensive living artist in the world, not you!
But at least, Banksy's work took a bashing at the auction too. Really, though, what could he expect? He refused to authenticate the authenticity of his authorship. 'Yeah, bollocks, art world I don't care if you poncy pricks don't buy my work? It's not mine.' How cool and postmodern. No worries that his mural on the side of a van 'Fungle Junk' only went for half the expected £150,000?
So Hirst sold some of his work for £111 million on 15 September. Not bad. All those animals and formaldehyde must cost a bit anyway.
It is surely a step forward for civilisation that top artist's these days don't have to die in poverty and disgrace before they achieve fame and certain players start selling their works for heaps of cash. If only Van Gogh had pickled his own ear in a jar and set up his own auction instead of descending into madness and eating his own paint. But then the art world, now, would be light years ahead of its time. Hirst would be a drunken farmer and Kate would be a checkout assistant. And today's artists would be conducting the world economy!
Well hey, Kate Moss has got to her earn her money somehow, and cocaine ain't cheap. Better through art than the too waifish fashion photos!
ReplyDeletePeople tend to forget that it's not the artists who set the prices, but the market, i.e. the people who are willing (and able) to pay almost any price for a Moss/Hirst/Banksy/whatever. And don't expect Damien Hirst to say "it's only animals in formaldehyde, so don't pay more than a couple of thousand, it simply isn't worth more".
ReplyDelete