Mike Jackson

I had a lot more respect for Lichtenstein until I discovered it was blatant theft. I mean, how hard would it have been to create his own panels. Lazy and talentless. At least Pollock created something original and Warhol's art was more a commentary on consumerism and didn't belittle what he stole from. I like Lucien Freud's art (wouldn't pay much for it, tho) but Francis Bacon's work reminds me of stuff I created when I was 10 and refused to paint inside the numbers.

Let me summarize pages and pages of that thread for you: Some people don't like Roy Lichtenstein. Other people like Roy Lichtenstein. Well put. I think that about covers it. I guess I should have started reading from beginning instead of the end. What I got from it was some people like Vanilla Ice and some people like Queen.

Thanks. I will have to read through it.

The problem is with the invention of the internet I have endless opportunities and subjects to get worked up about.

Since Gene brought up Lichtenstein earlier this article probably is on topic. http://comicsalliance.com/deconstructing-lichtenstein-source-comics-revealed-and-credited/ it has a link to a flickr account that shows all the comic artists he ripped off. http://www.flickr.com/photos/deconstructing-roy-lichtenstein/ Here is an article from the Village Voice that discusses the same topic. The Misbegotten Career of Roy Lichtenstein

Scroll down to Drake Tungsten's comment on this piece: http://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=1107190 So true, so true...

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Need to use that generator the next time I comment on a piece at Comicartfans. Confuse the heck out of someone.

I find this work menacing/playful because of the way the optical suggestions of the facture makes resonant a participation in the critical dialogue of the 90s. Well, at least that's what The Instant Art Critique Phrase Generator came up with. http://www.pixmaven.com/phrase_generator.html

Well, here is a perfect example of what I find pretentious about the fine art community. http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2014/02/oops-cleaning-lady-throws-away-expensive-modern-art-mistook-trash/ The cleaning lady should quit her job and become an art critic.

Oh, it is definitely the price paid for it. As they say: I don't know art but I know what I like. And I don't mind being challenged. One of my great faults is I am very opinionated, though, and I can't help myself but to express them. I probably should just hold my tongue more often than I do.

Well, I guess the short answer is I find it pretentious. I get that. FWIW I have to assume that a good part of the price on that triptych is the subject matter. I.e. a Bacon painting of Freud is sort of like a Ditko drawing of Kirby or a Kirby drawing of Ditko, if such things were to exist. Even if such drawings were not esoecially well realized pieces of art, they would command a high price because you have one comic art god drawing the other. So too with this picture of Freud by Bacon. 142 million is a lot of pretentiousness. If it was Norman Rockwell, N.C. Wyeth, or Maxfield Parrish, then I might be more understanding.

Well, I guess the short answer is I find it pretentious.