The real value of art: one day it’s a masterpiece, the next day it’s just another toilet
Dan Brawner
November 08, 2007
In 1917, French artist Marcel Duchamp caused a furor when he included in an exhibit a piece entitled, “Fountain”. It was a urinal. Not a sculpture of a urinal–a real, actual urinal. He hadn’t even made it, he just displayed it and called it art. (Well, he probably shined it up a little). Shortly after the show, the “Fountain” disappeared. Duchamp created several reproductions of it, but the original was never found. In 2004, a select group of 500 British art professionals voted the “Fountain” to be “the most influential artwork of the 20th Century.”
Back in those early days, Duchamp was a struggling artist who didn’t have a pot to... um, paint in. And if he were alive today, he would no doubt be amused to know that if his “Fountain” could be found, it would be worth millions.
Recently, the University of Iowa decided against selling a painting by an artist Time magazine once dubbed, “Jack, the Dripper,” because of his characteristic paint splatters. The piece, simply called “Mural” by the Abstract Expressionist Jackson Pollock had been originally commissioned by his wealthy patron Peggy Guggenheim for her New York City apartment. The painting is nearly 20 feet long and there is a story that she had to lop off eight inches to fit it on the wall. If that’s true and the fragment could be found, it would be worth about $4.7 million today, since “Mural”, itself is valued at around $140 million. That would work out to an hourly rate of $9.3 million and change because Pollock blasted through the piece in what he called, a 15-hour “stampede”. Instead of selling the masterpiece and using the proceeds to broaden its collection, the U of I decided to keep the painting which has done so much to put them on the art world’s map.
Sixty years ago, Guggenheim gave “Mural” to the University of Iowa Museum of Art where the monumental work has dominated the institution both artistically and physically ever since. It hangs, huge and menacing near the entrance, with its long squiggly columns of haunting, repetitive shapes and dark lines like wallpaper that turns into a child’s nightmare after the lights go out. Museum Director Howard Collinson had thought just maybe they could sell the thing while the value is at its peak and buy a lot of other art. But U of I officials were horrified at the thought of parting with their Pollock and now the matter is closed.
One can imagine, 200 years from now, some antique collector discovering Duchamp’s “Fountain” in the back of a plumbing supply house in Paris and rushing the masterpiece to Sotheby’s auction to claim a rich reward. “E-e-e-ew!,” the appraiser would say. “Isn’t that some kind of toilet?”
Back in those early days, Duchamp was a struggling artist who didn’t have a pot to... um, paint in. And if he were alive today, he would no doubt be amused to know that if his “Fountain” could be found, it would be worth millions.
Recently, the University of Iowa decided against selling a painting by an artist Time magazine once dubbed, “Jack, the Dripper,” because of his characteristic paint splatters. The piece, simply called “Mural” by the Abstract Expressionist Jackson Pollock had been originally commissioned by his wealthy patron Peggy Guggenheim for her New York City apartment. The painting is nearly 20 feet long and there is a story that she had to lop off eight inches to fit it on the wall. If that’s true and the fragment could be found, it would be worth about $4.7 million today, since “Mural”, itself is valued at around $140 million. That would work out to an hourly rate of $9.3 million and change because Pollock blasted through the piece in what he called, a 15-hour “stampede”. Instead of selling the masterpiece and using the proceeds to broaden its collection, the U of I decided to keep the painting which has done so much to put them on the art world’s map.
Sixty years ago, Guggenheim gave “Mural” to the University of Iowa Museum of Art where the monumental work has dominated the institution both artistically and physically ever since. It hangs, huge and menacing near the entrance, with its long squiggly columns of haunting, repetitive shapes and dark lines like wallpaper that turns into a child’s nightmare after the lights go out. Museum Director Howard Collinson had thought just maybe they could sell the thing while the value is at its peak and buy a lot of other art. But U of I officials were horrified at the thought of parting with their Pollock and now the matter is closed.
One can imagine, 200 years from now, some antique collector discovering Duchamp’s “Fountain” in the back of a plumbing supply house in Paris and rushing the masterpiece to Sotheby’s auction to claim a rich reward. “E-e-e-ew!,” the appraiser would say. “Isn’t that some kind of toilet?”
Print
Email
