Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
or not fair?
and a result of idiots throwing money around
What have you done with the cat_race we all know and... er... the cat_race we all know?
Maybe some things you say when you aren't trolling maybe.
Absolutely no grounds for a custodial sentence for defacing 'art'.
Sort of staggers me that artists don't believe in freedom of expression, to be honest.
to repair it, some degree of punishment seems fair. Maybe not a custodial sentence though.
one is when something gets vandalised, one is when something gets stolen (rare) and the last is when something sells for a shitload of money. anything which moves conversation away from that last and most boring topic is a good thing
so there you go, that's everything summed up
not even a question
i'm just the only person here capable of ignoring a stupid question
not being able to enjoy a piece of art anymore..
you don't think it would be interesting if he recast the same sculpture as a replacement? what if he recast the same sculpture with the same brass after buying it back. that would be a pretty interesting take on authenticity i think
it might be interesting if he recast it. especially considering hes dead.
i was more referencing the fact that you seemed to completely dismiss the idea that you could just remake a work of art if it gets destroyed.
nice to know you're checking in on conversations you've left though :)
keeping track of that sort of thing isn't very interesting.
some of it is great. like some of the ideas behind why he used coca-cola imagery and stuff. wasn't as keen on the electric chair business though.
seeing as he's been dead for about 25 years
get babs to make one for him (lol)
every year they roll out the old 'who will win the turner prize'
as long as he serves the full 2 years
but 2 years in jail is pretty daft. it's ok though he'll probably make some really dull art about the appeals process.
I kind of admire the bloke for literally writing his name into art history forever
better than shooting a Beatle for example
plus it's possible that a story such as this will in the long term increase the value of the painting so long as there's no actual damage to it materially
2 years chokey seems harsh
i think i'd be a bit more ok with it if he just did it for shabs and bants but he's written a manifesto about his art movement and then done it so he's a dull bellend.
...that has just stuck a couple of million on the value of that piece.
but - i don't really know what an appropriate punishment would be. It's not like he will be able to pay for the damage.
so yeah - bit harsh, i'll lock him up for 6 months or so i reckon
But I don't really care that much
he knew what he was doing and what the cost of the damage would be.
lock him up. throw away the key.
fuck the wee prick
don't really care that much though.
if he'd drawn a hairy bollocked, jizzing knob and then signed his name i'd be all for it.
Got me a movie
I want you to know
Slicing up eyeballs
I want you to know
Girlie so groovy
I want you to know
Don't know about you
But I am un chien andalusia
Up to be
Be a defacer
He's not in need of rehabilitation, not a danger to the public and I can't imagine that there are many, if any, people who might need to be deterred from this sort of crime. Don't see the point of MY TAXES!!1 paying for a custodial sentence for a hipster bellend.
but it's probably worthy of a prison sentence.
I think with valuing art, its not really the artist that is to blame, its the people who are willing to pay that much for some canvas and paint. So if he was trying to make some statement about people buying art at ridiculous prices, he should have done something different.