I wonder what percentage of...
I wonder what percentage of our income we or our governments spent on things we didn't need this year?
For the firewood lovers, when it was made do you think Noguchi gave no consideration to it? When an artist creates something do you think he finds the cheapest and most utilitarian framer he can find in the phone book, maybe he goes to Ikea? If you are given a bunch of flowers do you just put them in any old vase and when you look at a painting is paint the only thing you see?
Firewood
The "it looks like firewood" argument sounds very similar to that of a beginning painting student who cannot understand abstraction yet.
They cant tell a good one from a bad one, so therefore they have no ability to value it. (yet)
I suggest the firewood crowd leave the jury out for awhile, and LOOK at several hundred non representational sculptures. I suspect that if one REALLY LOOKS, some sculptures will look better than others. Then it becomes simple to see that something is going on in the good ones.
After many years of looking, you should be able to tell the difference between firewood and sculpture. (Just like its easy to see the difference between a knockoff and an Eames Lounger after a while)
Eameshead
This isn't my first rodeo. I would guess my eye is every bit as trained as yours. But who knows?
This is not a sculpture. It's a pedestal. And while I agree the joinery and proportions are nice, in context of the price it's still firewood. Just because you might have a trained eye and you like it, doesn't mean that you're right per se. Contrary to what you might believe, while there are certain accepted terms of 'good design' there is a gray area of subjectiveness. Sorry, it's plain and true.
Remember I said "in context." I would happily buy this, with no historical pedigree, to use (at what price? I am unsure right now). It's not ugly. It's simple and utilitarian... both concepts I like. Maybe I'd toss a plant on it. Use it as a side table. But it would by no means be my favorite piece of design. It would not strike my eyes with awe every time I passed it by to go to the bathroom. At that price it should no?
Readers can assume it will only appreciate in value all they want. But just because it sold for what it did this year has absolutely no indication to its future value. It would be highly unlikely to sell for half that next year in my opinion. What you have here is a lucky chance meeting of two similarly rich and determined buyers. This is not the real world in almost any other senerio.
Case in point, one year at de Pury a white Nelson Marshmallow sofa sold for around 129K. Two years later another white Nelson Marshmallow sofa sold for around 39K. And this was well before the economic meltdown that we are in. Pure chance.
I would not call this purchase an investment per se. And if it was, it was almost recklessly confident. That being said, you're entitled to your opinion.
The base is NOT a separate entity...
The base is not a separate entity. (That was the whole point of my first post.)
But because it has been auctioned off by itself, you and some others seem intent on discussing it as a stand alone object. (Which it was never meant to be)
I did not address any of my comments to the price. I dont really care about the price. I dont defend the price, nor do I care if it sells for a thousand bucks next time.
I was mostly reacting to "tiny armada's" dismissal of the base as "firewood" when I wrote the post above.
In my mind, we are looking at half a piece. Half of a thought. Simple. In fact, it probably should NOT feel "whole" if it is doing its job. It only got objectified separately because someone wanted to sell it.
I did not mean to imply that your eye is not informed. You dont have to like it.
I don't even LOVE it.
But where I DO disagree fully with you is when you try to critique the base as a stand alone object. Its NOT that. Someone just sold it that way, and that has dominated the conversation from the start.
Its half a piece. Half a thought. Probably meant to provide tension to a rounded form or something. Do you know of many half sculptures that are successful?
Firewood
You would HAVE TO KNOW the history of it or you would throw it away.
It has historical significance and that is it.
Dig your own grave if you want to argue it is anything special by it's construction or appearance. Hogwash.
This thing is only special due to who made it and it's historical importance and THAT is all.
As a stand-alone piece, it is total junk and has been made by blacksmiths for years to pound their craft almost identically (and better made).
Seriously, sit there and tell me with a straight face this is some amazing piece, oh please...if I threw this your way and told you my mate next door made it before you even knew about the auction, you would throw it out.
I can almost hear the clink of a champagne bottle that is almost empty by someone trying to sit there and type away some justification for this piece outside of it's historical importance.
I find this most amusing. Honestly.
You saw a ridiculous price and then sat there for hours pondering how to justify it when great design needs no such thought process - it speaks to you very quickly - rather than make you throw-up.
Come on, gimme another great reason why this piece is so lovely. Can't wait.
I have a block of wood that Ray Eames once stared at...I might get 100,000 at auction for it.
- A.s.
Tiny armada,
You continue...
Tiny armada,
You continue to completely miss my point. IT IS NOT A STAND ALONE PIECE. A base is often an extension of a sculpture. Read my other posts before you repeat yourself again. I
Who am I gonna go with? YOU? or Noguchi?
Tiny?
Noguchi.
Tiny?
Noguchi.
Tiny?
hahahahahahahahahaha
You INVITED those in support of the Noguchi to speak up.
I did.
Live with the fact that you CANT embrace what an international master is about.
Hack
I am not defending a base.
I am not defending half a of a sculpture, which is what this probably is.
I am simply saying that a hack will always come at you with this kind of "My kid could do that" type of argument. Its BORING.
Pollock got that one too. He did all right as I recall. They pay art restorers hundreds of dollars an hour to glue the "poorly crafted" enamel paint drips back onto the canvas.
Its the IDEA Tiny.
Hacks like you like to brush off everything with the old "its becaise hes famous" argument. But you never actually embrace that art is about ideas, and not just perfect "paint-jobs"
There are certainly more perfect objects than there are artists in this world.
Well said and agreed
Perhaps a couple of pointers might help TA out.
"Architecture starts when you carefully put two bricks together. There it begins." Mies van der Rohe.
If someone had posted this sans price and asked for a little analysis I promise you Mycenae would have been one of the first visual/historical associations I would have made, has it occured to you AS that the pedestal might be symbolic?
Or that just possibly you might not know a great deal about art or culture?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_culture
I'm Glad
I am glad it had a label on it, so that you knew who made it - and that someone told you who did it. Because your viewpoint on this piece kind of depends on that sort of thing.
The Mona Lisa was always a masterpiece regardless of who did it, and a Rembrandt can be spotted by it's nature.
This piece carries none of the qualities that gives it any hallmarks of a great piece, and as someone else put it - it is lucky the person did know who made it.
I love Noguchi's work, but I am not an artist whore who had to get everything a guy did and put it on (ironically) a pedestal and defend clearly, poor work.
On the other hand, I can appreciate the historical significance of a piece but I will not be blinded by god-worship of everything a guy did, knowing full well every artist usually starts off with total junk.
I would consider some of his works and the first prototype of those pieces being worth truly, large sums.
I think this sort of payment for his worse work, insulting to the guy - and I think he would agree. "Really? $320,000 for that? What about my other FINE work or first versions I threw together in a workshop that became iconic."
Let's see if you will fork out $5,000 for a licensed replica of it, and I might be convinced that you actually believe any of the opinions you think about this piece.
If HM or Knoll put out a "time" piece of this, t would be their worst seller - and you would at least be in luck because you would be one of the few owners.
You are still hung up on price
I have tried to move the discussion BEYOND the price that was paid.... several times now.
I have failed.
You keep throwing a big wet blanket of cash over the entire conversation, and then go on continuing attacking your own silly blanket.
You cant hear or see anything but those dollar signs. The horror!
Do you get goosebumps looking at the Mona Lisa behind the bullet proof glass too? A fake one behind the glass and you'd probably get the same goose bumps.
Labels indeed.
What a silly little lad you are, tktoo...
Your opinion is just that; your opinion. And you're entitled to it, however misguided or wrong you may be.
I've tried to stay away from this thread but your last post just pushed me right over the edge...
To think that you are somehow more informed or privy to "art" because you CHOOSE to see symbolism in this meager little "design" is just laughable. But you're entitled to look at it that way and you're entitled to see what you want. Again, however right or in this case wrong you may be.
It's certainly everyone's prerogative to approach art however they like. But to refer to this bench as art is just plain wrong. It's a simple little platform. What makes it art? The fact that a sculptor had a hand in creating it?
Answer me this then...
Would Nelson or Bertoia or any of Noguchi's mates have been wrong in eating a sandwich Isamu might've prepared for them?
Get over yourselves, for fuck's sake. It's so tiresome.
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com