Mmm!
I was with you all the way until I reached that little word “but”
The rest of that sentence was clearly your own opinion. And there, we differ.
1 Like
It looks as though it wasn’t a one off original! After the first one was eaten there is now a replacement. So presumably they are only worth $60,000 each. 
My understanding is that the artist sold 3 ‘installations’ of this piece of work at around $100k each. I also believe (assuming press reports are accurate), he also provided certificates of authenticity for each of the 3 installations which allow the owner to replace the banana.
This means that the only original piece of the ‘installation’ post banana replacement will be the Gaffa tape, and of course Gaffa tape will lose its stickiness over time. What does the owner do then? Does he or she apply fresh glue to the Gaffa tape, or does the certificate of authenticity allow the owner to replace the Gaffa tape as well? Surely not, because if the owner were to replace the grey Gaffa tape with a black equivalent, that would surely completely destroy the aesthetic of the work. It could become a bit of an artistic minefield.
What a farce!
1 Like
“One banana, two banana
Three banana, four
Four bananas make a bunch
And so do many more
Over hill and highway
The banana buggies go
Comin’ on to bring you
The Banana Splits Show“
Liz Phair
1 Like
Is this the ONLY artist in the news?
" Cattelan – who bought the banana at a local fruit market – is known for his comic pieces, including a fully functional 18-carat gold toilet titled America, which visitors to the Guggenheim were encouraged to use. The toilet was recently stolen from an exhibition in England."
1 Like
Here’s a different perspective than mine, albeit that I agree with parts of it.
You may not have like my “but” @Don. Perhaps I should explain further.
I would agree there are few pleasures greater than an hour or several at a great gallery but, objectively, depending on what it is you’re looking at, you could just as easily spend the time in some cases looking at photographs or the real thing. Additionally, whilst some of what you view may provoke feelings and questions it doesn’t have to be a picture to do so. Similarly, much as I want there to be a clear distinction between watching say Chernobyl on TV and Vic and Bob, objectively, there isn’t. You’re being entertained.
Bring this round to music and we’re back to the idea that critiquing the likes of others is pointless because at the end of the day it’s entertainment and we’re being entertained. Ditto the banana. It’s entertainment and we’ve been entertained.
I am childishly proud of the fact that I used this toilet when it was on display (well, behind a closed door) at the Guggenheim. The security guard in attendance permitted a maximum of 2 minutes per “use”.
The Link. Well, I agree, it’s a different perspective.
Entertainment. Let’s put it this way, a banana stuck to a wall with gaffa tape isn’t high on my list of worthwhile entertainment. And neither is jazz.
Just because we have been entertained by something, doesn’t (in my opinion) make it worthy of the title “art”. And just because something didn’t tick the “entertainment box” doesn’t mean it isn’t art. I appreciate that regarding this banana, you and I probably disagree. Others will no doubt agree with yourself, one or two might agree with me. (I provided my general estimates a few posts above 
)
One of those flash in the pan moments maybe?
Chortle
Quote:
“If you cannot learn to love real art at least learn to hate sham art”.
William Morris
3 Likes
A few comments from Mr Wilde:
‘All art is quite useless.’
‘Art never expresses anything but itself.’
‘One should either be a work of art or wear a work of art.’
‘Bad artists always admire each others’ work.’
‘The artist should never try to be popular. Rather the public should be more artistic.’
‘The only artists I have ever known who are personally delightful are bad artists. Good artists exist simply in what they make, and consequently are perfectly uninteresting in what they are.’
I think the literary comment may suit this best:
‘There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written or badly written. That is all.’
1 Like
The idea of using fruit as art is …well…just banana’s
My daughter never liked Mona-Lisa much in her early teens but Rauschenbergs goat she kept talking about for weeks.
I thought that I had said that I liked it. But perhaps I said I quite liked it…
Best
David
Fair enough!
However, what is her opinion of the artistic worth of a banana taped to a wall using gaffa tape?
I dont know :-). My view is that the economic value is what someone is prepared to pay.
Artistic value is harder but like Duchamps upside-down urinal I would say its more of an idea-piece. But even as such this is not very interesting (to me). The idea may just be provocation and in that case it at least became slightly successful when someone ate the banana.
All art is not good art. And modern art has not yet passed the filtering of surviving centuries and must be critisized and discussed (as happened here).
That’s from an old Morecambe and Wise show…about a toilet stolen from Scotland Yard.