Andy Warhol; Great Artist or Con Artist

[Savonarola]

I was watching Sister Wendy Beckett last night and when she got to Warhol she said something like "Andy Warhol; great artist or con artist?  The jury is still out on that."  If there's one jury I wouldn't want to try me, it's Languish.  So I thought I'd post the question here.

[Martinus]

I think this is a false alternative. All artists are con-artists from a certain perspective, and the greatest of artists are also the most successful con-artists.

After all, who in their right mind would pay millions of dollars for a collection of natural pigment splashes, on a piece of rag woven out of common plant, and nailed to four pieces of wood, yet we are perfectly happy to do so for Mona Lisa. If that's not con-art, I don't know what is.

Edit: Btw, I absolutely adore Sister Wendy Beckett. If all Christians were like her, I'd convert back.

[derspiess]

Edit: Btw, I absolutely adore Sister Wendy Beckett. If all Christians were like her, I'd convert back.

Thank God we're not all like her, then.

[Zanza]

Great artist.

After all, who in their right mind would pay millions of dollars for a collection of natural pigment splashes, on a piece of rag woven out of common plant, and nailed to four pieces of wood, yet we are perfectly happy to do so for Mona Lisa. If that's not con-art, I don't know what is.

Mona Lisa is painted on wood, not canvas.

[Scipio]

Great con artist.

[Sheilbh]

Both.  I also love Sister Wendy.

[DontSayBanana]

Both. Materially, no one in their right mind would pay for the art. It's the innovation of the concept that you're paying for, and it takes a great con artist to make you see that innovation as such.

[saskganesh]

tough. he did iconic stuff, but was overshadowed by his own vacuous celebrity. voted con, with misgivings.

[Queequeg]

Con.  I've yet to really "get" any art after the New Objectivity, to be honest, none of it connects the same way. 

[Darth Wagtaros]

Con.  I've yet to really "get" any art after the New Objectivity, to be honest, none of it connects the same way. 

Word son.

[Martinus]

Speaking of Sister Wendy, does anyone know where I can get her TV series in Region 2 encoding? I checked around but amazon.co.uk only offers to import it from the US (in Region 1 encoding) and HMV does not have it at all.

[Queequeg]

I think this is a false alternative. All artists are con-artists from a certain perspective, and the greatest of artists are also the most successful con-artists.

After all, who in their right mind would pay millions of dollars for a collection of natural pigment splashes, on a piece of rag woven out of common plant, and nailed to four pieces of wood, yet we are perfectly happy to do so for Mona Lisa. If that's not con-art, I don't know what is.

Can't agree here, at all.  The best works of art require months-years-of daily work.  Even the best Expressionist and Avant-Garde usually took some thought, work and skill.  Lichtenstein and Warhol?  Not so much.  I'd argue they'd have a tough time even claiming creativity, seeing as how the Russian Avant-Garde was doing similar things, only a lot better, 30 years before. 

[Martinus]

I think this is a false alternative. All artists are con-artists from a certain perspective, and the greatest of artists are also the most successful con-artists.

After all, who in their right mind would pay millions of dollars for a collection of natural pigment splashes, on a piece of rag woven out of common plant, and nailed to four pieces of wood, yet we are perfectly happy to do so for Mona Lisa. If that's not con-art, I don't know what is.

Can't agree here, at all.  The best works of art require months-years-of daily work.  Even the best Expressionist and Avant-Garde usually took some thought, work and skill.  Lichtenstein and Warhol?  Not so much.  I'd argue they'd have a tough time even claiming creativity, seeing as how the Russian Avant-Garde was doing similar things, only a lot better, 30 years before.

It's still not worth it.

And, in music, it's even more ridiculous to think that way - Mozart allegedly spent minutes writing some of his pieces, and they went into history as the work of genius. Your approach would make Salieri a greater artist than Mozart, because he took pains to produce his work.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

I think this is a false alternative. All artists are con-artists from a certain perspective, and the greatest of artists are also the most successful con-artists.

After all, who in their right mind would pay millions of dollars for a collection of natural pigment splashes, on a piece of rag woven out of common plant, and nailed to four pieces of wood, yet we are perfectly happy to do so for Mona Lisa. If that's not con-art, I don't know what is.

Can't agree here, at all.  The best works of art require months-years-of daily work.  Even the best Expressionist and Avant-Garde usually took some thought, work and skill.  Lichtenstein and Warhol?  Not so much.  I'd argue they'd have a tough time even claiming creativity, seeing as how the Russian Avant-Garde was doing similar things, only a lot better, 30 years before. 

I disagree. It takes a lot of skill to achieve what both Lich and Andy created. It looks effortless. but is far from it. I also agree that most great artists have a bit of the grifter in them. or like say Van Gogh, they don't. And we know how that turned out.

[charliebear]

I voted "con artist."  He took existing photos and silkscreened them.  What's so original about that?