He’s a really nice bloke too, totally unpretentious. He paints them en plein air with no subsequent touching up. Unlike a banana, it doesn’t go bad. The purpose of posting the picture was as an example of how opinions can vary so much. Part of me would be quite pleased if someone who visited said ‘I like that’ as there is always a slight ‘was I conned’ feeling. It’s not actually mine, it’s my wife’s.
I’ve seen the original. It is extraordinary. Huge. The Australian Government bought it (very controversially) in the mid 70s for what then seemed an exorbitant price. That purchase is now seen as a massive bargain by many people. Not so much as an “investment” as it will most-likely never be sold.
Agree with the “would I hang it” criteria. For Pollock, a property of substantial portions is a pre-requisite.
Specifically because to some people his music is simplistic formulaic early rock and roll. To others it’s a form of poetry. You draw your own lines and make your own justifications but looking at a banana on a wall is no sillier than looking at any picture.
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
