some artist ( Jackson Pollock) basically dribbled paint out of cans onto canvas, and this stuff is worth millions ? :ughhh:
old lady bought one for $5, turned down $2 million, even though its questionable if its real.
When I looked at this picture i thought it was a GPS map of something....that is art?
lead part of the story, more if you Google it
May 6, 2007
<HR><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=250 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=bodysmall width=244><SCRIPT> var storeInfo = new Array (2); var cbsx = 1; storeInfo[1] = '
Is it or isn\'t it? This is the painting Teri Horton maintains is a real Jackson Pollock. Horton believes her painting is worth about $50 million.*(CBS)
'; storeInfo[2] = '
Teri Horton*(CBS)
'; function movePrev(){ cbsx-=1; if (cbsx == 0){ cbsx = 2; document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[cbsx]; document.getElementById("numbers").innerHTML = listNumbers(); } else {document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[cbsx]; document.getElementById("numbers").innerHTML = listNumbers(); } } //end of movePrev function moveNext(){ cbsx+=1; if (cbsx == 2 + 1){ cbsx = 1; document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[cbsx]; document.getElementById("numbers").innerHTML = listNumbers(); } else {document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[cbsx]; document.getElementById("numbers").innerHTML = listNumbers(); } } //end of moveNext function listNumbers(){ var numberImg = ''; for(i=1;i<3;i++){ if(i == cbsx){ numberImg += '
';} else{ numberImg += '
';} } return numberImg; } //end of function function getPic(){ document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[1]; } </SCRIPT>
Is it or isn't it? This is the painting Teri Horton maintains is a real Jackson Pollock. Horton believes her painting is worth about $50 million. (CBS)
Quote
"But how dare they tell me it's not authentic? They laugh at me and say, 'You don't know what you're talking about.'"
<HR>
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
<HR>
</TD><TD width=6>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
(CBS) <!-- sphereit start -->Teri Horton is a 74-year-old retired truck driver with an eighth grade education. She likes to gamble a bit, and now she thinks she has hit the jackpot. Not in a casino, but in the high-stakes world of modern art.
Teri isn’t the kind of person who knows—or cares—much about art. But as CNN's Anderson Cooper reports, she has caused a stir in the upper reaches of the art world because of a painting she bought years ago, a painting she now believes is the work of the famous abstract expressionist Jackson Pollock.
If Teri's painting is by Pollock, it would likely be worth tens of millions of dollars. Not bad, considering she bought it as a gift for a friend and only paid $5 for it in a thrift shop in San Bernardino, Calif.
<HR width="50%">
"I picked up the canvas and took it up to the lady in the thrift store," Teri remembers. "And I asked her what she wanted for it and she said, 'Oh, give me eight dollars. And I said, 'I love my friend, but I don't love her that much.' So she gave it to me for five. And that's why, how I bought, why I bought it."
Teri, who drove big rigs for 20 years, says she never liked the painting much, and only bought it as a joke. 60 Minutes met her in a New York warehouse where she now stores it.
"We were gonna get the darts and throw at it, but we never got around to it," Teri recalls, laughing. "We got to drinking too much beer and never went in the trailer and got the darts."
The painting was too big to fit through the door of her friend's trailer, so Teri put it in a yard sale, where an art teacher from a nearby college saw it. "He looked at it and he said 'I’m no expert,' he said, 'but this could be a Jackson Pollock.' And that’s when I said 'Who the f--- is Jackson Pollock?'" she remembers.
Asked what he told her, Teri says, "He just started laughing. And he went on to tell me who he was."
Jackson Pollock was, and is, one of the most important American artists of the 20th century. His work was stunningly original and extremely influential; the Museum of Modern Art in New York has devoted a whole room to his paintings.
Pollock made those paintings by dripping, splattering and pouring paint on a canvas. He barely eked by, until those so-called "drip" paintings started to sell in the early 1950s. His reputation continued to grow after he died in 1956 in a drunk-driving accident, and so did the prices for those paintings.
One Pollock work, called "Number 5," recently sold for a record $140 million.
Teri may not know much about art, but after studying Pollock's works, and talking to people, she became convinced her painting was the real thing.
Teri thinks her painting is probably worth around $50 million. "And there are collectors that would love to have it, if they could get the art world to back it," she says.
May 6, 2007
<HR><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=250 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=bodysmall width=244><SCRIPT> var storeInfo = new Array (2); var cbsx = 1; storeInfo[1] = '
'; storeInfo[2] = '
'; function movePrev(){ cbsx-=1; if (cbsx == 0){ cbsx = 2; document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[cbsx]; document.getElementById("numbers").innerHTML = listNumbers(); } else {document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[cbsx]; document.getElementById("numbers").innerHTML = listNumbers(); } } //end of movePrev function moveNext(){ cbsx+=1; if (cbsx == 2 + 1){ cbsx = 1; document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[cbsx]; document.getElementById("numbers").innerHTML = listNumbers(); } else {document.getElementById("pictures").innerHTML = storeInfo[cbsx]; document.getElementById("numbers").innerHTML = listNumbers(); } } //end of moveNext function listNumbers(){ var numberImg = ''; for(i=1;i<3;i++){ if(i == cbsx){ numberImg += '
Quote
"But how dare they tell me it's not authentic? They laugh at me and say, 'You don't know what you're talking about.'"
<HR>
Teri Horton
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
<HR>
</TD><TD width=6>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
(CBS) <!-- sphereit start -->Teri Horton is a 74-year-old retired truck driver with an eighth grade education. She likes to gamble a bit, and now she thinks she has hit the jackpot. Not in a casino, but in the high-stakes world of modern art.
Teri isn’t the kind of person who knows—or cares—much about art. But as CNN's Anderson Cooper reports, she has caused a stir in the upper reaches of the art world because of a painting she bought years ago, a painting she now believes is the work of the famous abstract expressionist Jackson Pollock.
If Teri's painting is by Pollock, it would likely be worth tens of millions of dollars. Not bad, considering she bought it as a gift for a friend and only paid $5 for it in a thrift shop in San Bernardino, Calif.
<HR width="50%">
"I picked up the canvas and took it up to the lady in the thrift store," Teri remembers. "And I asked her what she wanted for it and she said, 'Oh, give me eight dollars. And I said, 'I love my friend, but I don't love her that much.' So she gave it to me for five. And that's why, how I bought, why I bought it."
Teri, who drove big rigs for 20 years, says she never liked the painting much, and only bought it as a joke. 60 Minutes met her in a New York warehouse where she now stores it.
"We were gonna get the darts and throw at it, but we never got around to it," Teri recalls, laughing. "We got to drinking too much beer and never went in the trailer and got the darts."
The painting was too big to fit through the door of her friend's trailer, so Teri put it in a yard sale, where an art teacher from a nearby college saw it. "He looked at it and he said 'I’m no expert,' he said, 'but this could be a Jackson Pollock.' And that’s when I said 'Who the f--- is Jackson Pollock?'" she remembers.
Asked what he told her, Teri says, "He just started laughing. And he went on to tell me who he was."
Jackson Pollock was, and is, one of the most important American artists of the 20th century. His work was stunningly original and extremely influential; the Museum of Modern Art in New York has devoted a whole room to his paintings.
Pollock made those paintings by dripping, splattering and pouring paint on a canvas. He barely eked by, until those so-called "drip" paintings started to sell in the early 1950s. His reputation continued to grow after he died in 1956 in a drunk-driving accident, and so did the prices for those paintings.
One Pollock work, called "Number 5," recently sold for a record $140 million.
Teri may not know much about art, but after studying Pollock's works, and talking to people, she became convinced her painting was the real thing.
Teri thinks her painting is probably worth around $50 million. "And there are collectors that would love to have it, if they could get the art world to back it," she says.
List of highest prices paid at auctions or private sales (inflation adjusted)
This list is ordered by consumer price index inflation-adjusted value (in bold) in 2006 United States dollars. Where necessary, the price is first converted to dollars using the exchange rate at the time the painting was sold. The inflation adjustment may change as recent inflation rates are often revised. A list in another currency would probably be in a slightly different order due to exchange rate fluctuations. Paintings are only listed once, i.e. for the highest price sold.
<TABLE class=wikitable style="FONT-SIZE: 93%"><TBODY><TR><TH></TH><TH>Painting</TH><TH>Artist</TH><TH>Year</TH><TH>Price (in millions)</TH><TH>Date of sale</TH><TH>Seller</TH><TH>Buyer</TH><TH>Auction house</TH></TR><TR><TD>1</TD><TD>No. 5, 1948</TD><TD>Jackson Pollock</TD><TD>1948</TD><TD>$140 ($140)</TD><TD>Nov 2, 2006</TD><TD>David Geffen</TD><TD>David Martinez</TD><TD>private sale</TD></TR><TR><TD>2</TD><TD>Woman III</TD><TD>Willem de Kooning</TD><TD>1953</TD><TD>$137.5 ($137.5)</TD><TD>Nov 2006</TD><TD>David Geffen</TD><TD>Steven A. Cohen</TD><TD>private sale via Larry Gagosian</TD></TR><TR><TD>3</TD><TD>Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I</TD><TD>Gustav Klimt</TD><TD>1907</TD><TD>$135 ($135)</TD><TD>Jun 18, 2006</TD><TD>Maria Altmann</TD><TD>Ronald Lauder, Neue Galerie</TD><TD>private sale</TD></TR><TR><TD>4</TD><TD>Portrait of Dr. Gachet</TD><TD>Vincent van Gogh</TD><TD>1890</TD><TD>$82.5 ($127.3)</TD><TD>May 15, 1990</TD><TD>Siegfried Kramarsky family</TD><TD>Ryoei Saito <SUP>[1]</SUP></TD><TD>Christie's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>5</TD><TD>Bal au moulin de la Galette, Montmartre</TD><TD>Pierre-Auguste Renoir</TD><TD>1876</TD><TD>$78.1 ($120.5)</TD><TD>May 17 1990</TD><TD>Betsey Whitney</TD><TD>Ryoei Saito <SUP>[2]</SUP></TD><TD>Sotheby's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>6</TD><TD>Garçon à la pipe</TD><TD>Pablo Picasso</TD><TD>1905</TD><TD>$104.2 ($111.2)</TD><TD>May 4, 2004</TD><TD>Greentree foundation (Whitney family)</TD><TD></TD><TD>Sotheby's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>7</TD><TD>Irises</TD><TD>Vincent van Gogh</TD><TD>1889</TD><TD>$53.9 ($95.7)</TD><TD>Nov 11, 1987</TD><TD>son of Joan Whitney Payson</TD><TD>Alan Bond <SUP>[3]</SUP></TD><TD>Sotheby's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>8</TD><TD>Dora Maar au Chat</TD><TD>Pablo Picasso</TD><TD>1941</TD><TD>$95.2 ($95.2)</TD><TD>May 3, 2006</TD><TD>Gidwitz family</TD><TD></TD><TD>Sotheby's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>9</TD><TD>Portrait de l'artiste sans barbe</TD><TD>Vincent van Gogh</TD><TD>1889</TD><TD>$71.5 ($88.5)</TD><TD>Nov 19, 1998</TD><TD>heirs of Jacques Koerfer</TD><TD></TD><TD>Christie's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>10</TD><TD>Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer II</TD><TD>Gustav Klimt</TD><TD>1912</TD><TD>$87.9 ($87.9)</TD><TD>Nov 8, 2006</TD><TD>Maria Altmann</TD><TD></TD><TD>Christie's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>11</TD><TD>Massacre of the Innocents</TD><TD>Peter Paul Rubens</TD><TD>1611</TD><TD>£49.5 ($94.7)</TD><TD>Jul 10, 2002</TD><TD>an Austrian family</TD><TD>Kenneth Thomson <SUP>[4]</SUP></TD><TD>Sothe</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
This list is ordered by consumer price index inflation-adjusted value (in bold) in 2006 United States dollars. Where necessary, the price is first converted to dollars using the exchange rate at the time the painting was sold. The inflation adjustment may change as recent inflation rates are often revised. A list in another currency would probably be in a slightly different order due to exchange rate fluctuations. Paintings are only listed once, i.e. for the highest price sold.
<TABLE class=wikitable style="FONT-SIZE: 93%"><TBODY><TR><TH></TH><TH>Painting</TH><TH>Artist</TH><TH>Year</TH><TH>Price (in millions)</TH><TH>Date of sale</TH><TH>Seller</TH><TH>Buyer</TH><TH>Auction house</TH></TR><TR><TD>1</TD><TD>No. 5, 1948</TD><TD>Jackson Pollock</TD><TD>1948</TD><TD>$140 ($140)</TD><TD>Nov 2, 2006</TD><TD>David Geffen</TD><TD>David Martinez</TD><TD>private sale</TD></TR><TR><TD>2</TD><TD>Woman III</TD><TD>Willem de Kooning</TD><TD>1953</TD><TD>$137.5 ($137.5)</TD><TD>Nov 2006</TD><TD>David Geffen</TD><TD>Steven A. Cohen</TD><TD>private sale via Larry Gagosian</TD></TR><TR><TD>3</TD><TD>Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I</TD><TD>Gustav Klimt</TD><TD>1907</TD><TD>$135 ($135)</TD><TD>Jun 18, 2006</TD><TD>Maria Altmann</TD><TD>Ronald Lauder, Neue Galerie</TD><TD>private sale</TD></TR><TR><TD>4</TD><TD>Portrait of Dr. Gachet</TD><TD>Vincent van Gogh</TD><TD>1890</TD><TD>$82.5 ($127.3)</TD><TD>May 15, 1990</TD><TD>Siegfried Kramarsky family</TD><TD>Ryoei Saito <SUP>[1]</SUP></TD><TD>Christie's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>5</TD><TD>Bal au moulin de la Galette, Montmartre</TD><TD>Pierre-Auguste Renoir</TD><TD>1876</TD><TD>$78.1 ($120.5)</TD><TD>May 17 1990</TD><TD>Betsey Whitney</TD><TD>Ryoei Saito <SUP>[2]</SUP></TD><TD>Sotheby's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>6</TD><TD>Garçon à la pipe</TD><TD>Pablo Picasso</TD><TD>1905</TD><TD>$104.2 ($111.2)</TD><TD>May 4, 2004</TD><TD>Greentree foundation (Whitney family)</TD><TD></TD><TD>Sotheby's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>7</TD><TD>Irises</TD><TD>Vincent van Gogh</TD><TD>1889</TD><TD>$53.9 ($95.7)</TD><TD>Nov 11, 1987</TD><TD>son of Joan Whitney Payson</TD><TD>Alan Bond <SUP>[3]</SUP></TD><TD>Sotheby's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>8</TD><TD>Dora Maar au Chat</TD><TD>Pablo Picasso</TD><TD>1941</TD><TD>$95.2 ($95.2)</TD><TD>May 3, 2006</TD><TD>Gidwitz family</TD><TD></TD><TD>Sotheby's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>9</TD><TD>Portrait de l'artiste sans barbe</TD><TD>Vincent van Gogh</TD><TD>1889</TD><TD>$71.5 ($88.5)</TD><TD>Nov 19, 1998</TD><TD>heirs of Jacques Koerfer</TD><TD></TD><TD>Christie's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>10</TD><TD>Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer II</TD><TD>Gustav Klimt</TD><TD>1912</TD><TD>$87.9 ($87.9)</TD><TD>Nov 8, 2006</TD><TD>Maria Altmann</TD><TD></TD><TD>Christie's, New York</TD></TR><TR><TD>11</TD><TD>Massacre of the Innocents</TD><TD>Peter Paul Rubens</TD><TD>1611</TD><TD>£49.5 ($94.7)</TD><TD>Jul 10, 2002</TD><TD>an Austrian family</TD><TD>Kenneth Thomson <SUP>[4]</SUP></TD><TD>Sothe</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Its a dropcloth for 140 million
Critical debate
Controversy swirls over the alleged sale of No. 5, 1948 in 2006 for a reported $140 million
Pollock's work has always polarized critics and has been the focus of many important critical debates.
Harold Rosenberg spoke of the way Pollock's work had changed painting, "what was to go on the canvas was not a picture but an event. The big moment came when it was decided to paint 'just to paint.' The gesture on the canvas was a gesture of liberation from value — political, aesthetic, moral."
Clement Greenberg supported Pollock's work on formalistic grounds. It fitted well with Greenberg's view of art history as being about the progressive purification in form and elimination of historical content. He therefore saw Pollock's work as the best painting of its day and the culmination of the Western tradition going back via Cubism and Cézanne to Monet.
Posthumous exhibitions of Pollock's work had been sponsored by the Congress for Cultural Freedom, an organization to promote American culture and values backed by the CIA. Certain left wing scholars, most prominently Eva Cockcroft, argue that the U.S. government and wealthy elite embraced Pollock and abstract expressionism in order to place the United States firmly in the forefront of global art and devalue socialist realism.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-2>[3]</SUP> <SUP class=reference id=_ref-3>[4]</SUP> In the words of Cockcroft, Pollock became a 'weapon of the Cold War'.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-4>[5]</SUP>
Painter Norman Rockwell's work Connoisseur [1] also appears to make a commentary on the Pollock style. The painting features what seems to be a rather upright man in a suit standing before a Jackson Pollock splatter painting. The contrast between the man and the Pollock painting, along with the construction of the scene, seems to emphasize the disparity between the comparatively unrecognizable Jackson Pollock style and traditional figure and landscape based art styles, as well as the monumental changes in the cultural sense of aesthetics brought on by the modern art movement.
Feminists criticized the machismo surrounding abstract expressionism, seeing Pollock's work in particular as the acting out of the phallocentric male fantasy on the symbolically supine canvas.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-5>[6]</SUP>
Other critics, such as Craig Brown, have been astonished that decorative "wallpaper," essentially brainless, could gain such a position in art history alongside Giotto, Titian, and Velazquez.
Reynolds News in a 1959 headline said, "This is not art — it's a joke in bad taste."
Critical debate
Controversy swirls over the alleged sale of No. 5, 1948 in 2006 for a reported $140 million
Pollock's work has always polarized critics and has been the focus of many important critical debates.
Harold Rosenberg spoke of the way Pollock's work had changed painting, "what was to go on the canvas was not a picture but an event. The big moment came when it was decided to paint 'just to paint.' The gesture on the canvas was a gesture of liberation from value — political, aesthetic, moral."
Clement Greenberg supported Pollock's work on formalistic grounds. It fitted well with Greenberg's view of art history as being about the progressive purification in form and elimination of historical content. He therefore saw Pollock's work as the best painting of its day and the culmination of the Western tradition going back via Cubism and Cézanne to Monet.
Posthumous exhibitions of Pollock's work had been sponsored by the Congress for Cultural Freedom, an organization to promote American culture and values backed by the CIA. Certain left wing scholars, most prominently Eva Cockcroft, argue that the U.S. government and wealthy elite embraced Pollock and abstract expressionism in order to place the United States firmly in the forefront of global art and devalue socialist realism.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-2>[3]</SUP> <SUP class=reference id=_ref-3>[4]</SUP> In the words of Cockcroft, Pollock became a 'weapon of the Cold War'.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-4>[5]</SUP>
Painter Norman Rockwell's work Connoisseur [1] also appears to make a commentary on the Pollock style. The painting features what seems to be a rather upright man in a suit standing before a Jackson Pollock splatter painting. The contrast between the man and the Pollock painting, along with the construction of the scene, seems to emphasize the disparity between the comparatively unrecognizable Jackson Pollock style and traditional figure and landscape based art styles, as well as the monumental changes in the cultural sense of aesthetics brought on by the modern art movement.
Feminists criticized the machismo surrounding abstract expressionism, seeing Pollock's work in particular as the acting out of the phallocentric male fantasy on the symbolically supine canvas.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-5>[6]</SUP>
Other critics, such as Craig Brown, have been astonished that decorative "wallpaper," essentially brainless, could gain such a position in art history alongside Giotto, Titian, and Velazquez.
Reynolds News in a 1959 headline said, "This is not art — it's a joke in bad taste."
