you didn't answer my question. Post #25 doesn't answer it. Successful in what way?
Donít be obtuse, Russ, unless itís beyond you to do anything else. Do you agree or disagree that Lik has had a successful career? Yes or no. If your answer is ďnoĒ then can you provide any evidence to support your claim?
> Is Gursky's photograph fine art, worth 4.3 million?
Are you alluding to his Rhein II which recently sold for $4.3 million? If you are asking about this work can you make a case that the buyer was coerced into buying it? If you can't make that case, then absolutely yes, it was worth the amount paid for it.
If you are alluding to another of Gurskyís works, then state which work.
> If so, what distinguishes it from the average tourist snapshot, which, if this is the standard, ought to be worth at least 4 million and change.
Iím not a professional art appraiser so donít have an authoritative answer, but two words will summarize: Critical acclaim.
> How about Sherman's "Untitled #98?" What do you see in it that distinguishes it from the average family snapshot and makes it worth roughly 3.98 million more than a print you'd get for $5 from the local drugstore?
> What I see is an artificial "art" market that, in many ways, is a lot like the Federal Reserve. The "value" of its product is accepted on faith. In one case the object is a dollar bill. In the other it's a photographic print.
Iím sure you do see that. However using a weak analogy to attempt a facile point is not very bright. Yet that is exactly what you did.
If you want to claim the value of art is artificial then stick to that point and it will fall on its face when compared to other works by successful artists over history. People are willing to pay a lot for things they like. This is known as a fact. When an artist does successful work after successful work over a span of years to decades, the works tend to draw larger purchase prices. That too, is undisputable.
Itís one thing to not like an artist or their works. Iím fine with that. Bluntly, only an idiot or emotionally disturbed individual would state that obviously successful artists are not, in fact, successful.