Also, Slate has an article on a 4-year old child who has sold over $300,000 worth of paintings. The article is somewhat dubious on whether the child had help from her father, but it also raises an interesting question: if a child did paint the work on the left, could it actually be considered art?
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
How To: Become An Art Afficianado
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It's interesting that people quit buying the work when they thought her father had actually painted them.
Why? What's the difference?
I am guessing people were buying as an investment, thinking this kid was some sort of phenom and that her future work would drive up the value of her earlier paintings.
Post a Comment