moyanerd
115670
1003
27
The museum thought it was going to get remakes of two earlier works Haaning has in the Kunsten museum in Denmark.
Saucy sauce: https://themotherofallnerds.com/take-the-money-and-run/
SophieClockwise
FreePalestineAndTheWorldFromIsrael
Basically the real life equivalent of NFT Art
SciCommQueer
It's a protest against the low pay he received for the commission
WoodHandle
Sheesh - I would have done that for $50k.
fnordy
"My Remaining F###s" (oils)
acoudes
At least duct tape a banana to it or something
catchynamehereplease
Art is subjective. That's a fuckimg master piece if you ask me.
lithiau
Yeah, that museum have asked for the money back, and he said he will when the exhibition is over.
GothamGalInsomniac
Banana + duct tape = $120-150K. Ugh.
mdizzly
Alternative title 'this is a money laundering machine'
repancake
No matter how much I read about it, I still don’t understand how it works. Original art owner/buyer still have to report income.
ataraxia007
Not just this piece - but the art scene in general - www.artandobject.com/news/how-money-laundering-works-art-world
saturatedcottonballs
Title it "Remaining faith in mankind"
Squeleton
Well one things for sure: it's been getting more publicity then any other artwork there currently
rbudrick
I made this exact painting once. I should sue.
abovethecloudsboy
I'm so over art :(
waznewz
As a danish guy, i can confirm.. https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/kultur/kunstneren-tog-pengene-og-loeb-vaerket-er-der-mangler-en-halv-million
jhburn
The fuck you lookin at?
FMswottingTottington
Don't you see?!! If I admit then I was fooled but if I fool you aswell then I am not the only one fooled and we can fight the next togeather
MoxieMonster
CMackthe3rd
Sayagain
A rabbit in a snow storm
reichstein
surrounded by polar-bear ninjas
pixelsnader
This is fraud pure and simple. If you buy an empty canvas, invisible statue, or cryptoart, that's on you. You know what you're getting. But☞
pixelsnader
here the agreed upon piece differs from the delivered piece. Unless he worded it very carefully (which I doubt because he mentions breach ☞
pixelsnader
of contract) this is simply a contractor not fulfilling the contract, and thus has to reimburse and potentially pay damages.
unkiereamus
I read about this previously, the institution paid him 6kish for the work, and loaned him 84kish to use in the art. Their take on it (1/2)
unkiereamus
is that they've got an art piece to display, and as long as they get the money loaned to him back when the contract is up, they're happy2/2
kiddk00l
GiantMoron
It is not art... It is just a dick move.
Fishkeeper
Hey, they paid for art about money, and they got art about money.
Neoeon
I'm not a fan of the whole "Art" thing but for some reason I appreciate this.
relevent
You're mistaken, it is art. It is also a profoundly dick move.
Fishkeeper
Yeah, and hilarious.
TheMouseOfMadness
honestly I think that just lends more weight to the artistic statement
loopthegif
Oh no we’ve now become an internationally recognised museum and it only cost us $84k… the horror of all the PR and queues of people!!
Youhavinagiraffe
Like the Banksy painting being shredded, "oh no, now this art is worthless... despite being even more unique and famous than it was before!"
WhenInDoubtC4
Is this the art version of "The Emperor's New Clothes"?
livurz
DIINKELBERG
Who else thinks this is a part of a money laundering scheme?
MadMupp
Modern art is fraud
AMassivePotato
This is funny depending on who it's being done to. Doing it to a museum seems pretty lame.
sarkonas
Cool, sue the guy for the breach of contract and move on. This is more stupid than a banana taped to a wall.
FTUG
Reminds me of Salvatore Garau who sold an invisible sculpture for 18k
kamtargaming
He didn't stop here. They hired a team to move it up...
awfulmetalbar
Wait until you hear about NFTs
flashedjunkmind
I really don’t understand what they are. Can you explain?
FTUG
.
DrFrankensteinWasTheMonster
I think most modern “art” is for the purpose of rich people moving money around without suspicion/ for tax benefits
dEXm64
It's actually in my living room as we speak. Such a great piece
StonesOnTheHill
You know the kicker? Me and some lads nicked the thing back in August. Fucking rubes don't even know it's missing yet. Gonna make us rich!
Shamorza
To be fair, it could signify the the dichotomy between masterpiece and bullshit.
GeForcen
Nah mate, he just sold nothing for 18k
Shamorza
True, but you gotta admit his act of selling bullshit for 18 grands was a masterpiece. It takes skills;)
stronomer
Art is about context. This works.
TrueTalk
Art is enhanced by context, but it should not solely be context without art there too. That should be called something else, or insults art
stronomer
This was true until ~1914: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readymades_of_Marcel_Duchamp
Torsun
No the context is, the contract was that the money had to be used to make the art piece (like the last time) and not as his payment.
lDanielHolm
He's admitted that he's breaching his contract and that it's part of the art (but denies that it's theft). He said he's keeping the money.
stronomer
? Why is there a difference? It's not a paint job for a wall or ceiling.
Torsun
scroll down a bit and you see his previous work https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/jens-haaning-kunsten-museum-modern-art/index.html
NERDRAGEohacat
He was paid $3900 to recreate a previous work, the $84k was loaned as material to be used in that work, he stole the material.
CookieJar6502
The world of art for atleast the past 100 years is just pretentious shitposting
skellington01
Shitposting with extra steps (which are: shipping, storage, money laundering, tax planning... and some art:))
mistermiggs
*money laundering
qPRdxH4UXm36HS9rJgLA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5sOuET8UWA
TheArrestingAbhorrentArrantAbominableAlliterator
Shamorza
Not true. There have been as many good and not-so-good art in our era as it has been the case in previous eras.
bazookasoup
So.. reading the article, it seems the money was supposed to be on the frame. The artist didnt like his salary and stole the money.
AmArschdieRaeuber
100 years is a long time. I get that you don't like art, but that's not really an argument to call so much of it shit.
Youhavinagiraffe
The problem isn't the art. It's our capitalist system putting cash values on the inherently personal subjective value of artistic works
ryohji
DonGeilo2087
You got it all wrong. It's not that art is now shitposting. It's that shitposting has always been art.
SilkyAvenger
DKB13
Nah rubbish, been some amazing art in the last 100 years; Hockney? Picasso? Matisse? Warhol? Dali? Hopper?
SoupCanMan
Rebecca Guay
billstranger
I mean, not Warhol. Dali is the shit, though
DKB13
Yeah, i mean its subjective ennit. Hockneys my favourite listed, and he's the most contemporary of the bunch
TheMuellmann
Dalí sold plaster casts of his own butt once he realised people would pay for anything bearing his signature.
Foxsayy
Oh yeah. He didn't pay for shit at the high dollar places because he'd ask for the maitre d and hand him a check with a his sketch on it.
DKB13
I mean, that's funny ennit. He also has thousands of crude dick and tit sketches. Doesn't detract from him being a great artists though imo
5amNonsense
Dali was a bit of a dickhead all-around, honestly
AmArschdieRaeuber
Yeah, massive fascist sympathiser.
BlueLanternBraxx
I mean, my five year old can pull a passable Picasso
DKB13
Pull?
LespritDeLescalier22
But he doesn’t. And if he did, it wouldn’t be with the same intent as the artist. And at the time, Picasso was cutting edge.
IlluminaBlade
oh yah a wall of Campbells soup, astounding.
DKB13
Even if abstract and more text book "modern art" aren't your thing, then there are plenty of more traditional artists in the era, like Freud
5amNonsense
Look if you're gonna cherry pick go right ahead, but if you do, you've got no one but yourself to blame if your cherry selection sucks
DKB13
If you look at all the responses, people only focus on the abstract and ignore of the more classical style artists.
DKB13
There's a weird perception that all modern and contemporary art is just Rothko or Malevich
DKB13
Like it or not, everyone reading this will know exactly the picture you're on about
SexSponge
Yeah, because I've been to the supermarket every week since I was like 6.
Foxsayy
I don't.
HelloDarknessMyOld
Roy Lichtenstein approves.
BigFatFailureTurtle
Everyone's heard of certain "celebrities" too, that doesn't make them talented.
DKB13
That logic is flawed, the subject is artwork. Everyone knows what HIV is, doesn't mean its good.
upfr0mhere
Everyone reading this knows what a blue waffle is too, doesn't make it good or art
DKB13
False equivalence, everyone also knows who the nazis are, doesn't mean they're good. The subject is artwork, prominence does imply 1/2
AngryGraphicDesigner
As an artist I like it, but I don’t think many people will agree
NinjaCongo
I like it! Art should disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed.
Fishkeeper
I mean, it is pretty funny.
EveryNameIsTakenDammit
As a non-artist, I'm laughing my ass right off.
Sayagain
Aren't we all artists?
ProbablyNotABotButHowCanIBeSure
If you are an artist as this guy is, then of course you do xD
LaughingInTheFaceOfDanger
Indeed I like it because it makes a statement hahaha
Eli93
As someone who likes pretentious fucks getting screwed over, I like it, but it does nothing for art.
agonarch
The problem with this piece is he wasn't paid to make anything random, he was paid to remake a copy of a previous piece, which he didn't do.
lDanielHolm
Yeah, it's different from what they asked for, but that's what he's claiming is the art in the piece. "I took your money and ran."
GreaterDog
He was going to be out of pocket after all was said and done, which is kind of a dick move by a museum who was putting on an exhibition
GreaterDog
on the value of labor
NERDRAGEohacat
I have my doubts about his claim, given this is what he was paid $3900 to recreate: https://images.artfacts.net/exhibpics/321945.jpg
TheMouseOfMadness
it's like the duct tape banana, sure, anyone could've done it... but they didn't. that's the art. that someone was creative in that way
RevolioClockworkJr
Except that passing off a blank canvas as a piece of art has been done before, many times over the last 100 years probably.
RowRowFightThePowaSimon
Disagree. The art is that they paid for someone to do basically nothing. I can't walk in and sell that. Im not well known. Pretentious.
TheMouseOfMadness
Ok first off, excellent username reference. Second, you make a very good point but I still love the audacity of it even if it needs standing
sturmhauke
That's art in the same way that shitposting here is art. Except nobody gets paid $120k for shitposting here.
TheMouseOfMadness
then we need to be shitposting in better company
RogerTheCactus
Who's stopping you from contacting your local gallery and trying to sell them your memes? Or to put on a show with them? Go for it!
TrueTalk
As a non-artist who occasionally wants to get more into art appreciation but doesn't get modern art, shit like this actively disengages me
TrueTalk
Not just that I find such empty gestures with artistic talent stupid but it also in turn makes most other modern art seem more worthless
SerialChickenLover
Remember the banana duct-taped to the wall?
DrMarioSThompson
How else are you going to measure the wall?
TrueTalk
Unfortunately I do. The reason/meaning/artist behind it, though, no.
TrueTalk
Thus as an overall artistic performance/statement/whatever it tried to be, it's literally nothing, to me. The mess left behind by a child
TrueTalk
It means the times when I tolerate inherently crappy-looking -outcome modern art assuming that the skill is in the process, that's not so
TrueTalk
So seeing as the whole pull of 90% of modern art is "Looks awful/unartistic but just wait this special thing went into making it", insulting
TrueTalk
Rather than spend effort to work out why modern art is worth my attention, pieces like this tell me that 0 effort went into it, so it's not.
Djchoragos
I bet 10kr he returns the money after the exhibit closes. I agree with you I like it and I bet the museum loves the attention.
Djchoragos
I mean very few people make the trip to Aalborg for the museum
Sageypie
Museum is currently in legal proceedings against him. They've given him until January to return the money or they'll sue for breach of-
Sageypie
-contract. The money was specifically for recreations of earlier works, and he pulled this saying it was a statement of an artist's time-
Sageypie
-and work, and claiming how he would be out money because if having to buy the materials for the recreations himself. Like trying to say-
Sageypie
-that he wouldn't even break even on 84k after buying paint and canvas for two paintings.