With Hard Asset Prices Plummeting, What's Next for the OA Market?

[vodou]

And for those within visiting distance of CT there is the New Britain Museum of American Art. Their permanent collection contains a wonderful display of illustration art, all the usual artists you see in the HA sales. And if you like pulp paintings...

 

http://articles.courant.com/2013-05-08/entertainment/hc-nbmaa-pulp-illo-0508-20130508_1_pulp-fiction-illustrations-covers

http://www.nbmaa.org/

 

 

[suspense39]

Like it or not,this is probably much more in line with what could potentially happen with OCA and museum collections.in terms of being part of any type of permanent collection or display, It would be placed in a design or illustration sub-wing.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/03/momas-video-game-obsession-art-design_n_3529933.html?utm_hp_ref=arts

[delekkerste]

All good links, everyone. I think they are basically supportive of what I have said previously - you'll see OA show up in temporary exhibitions and annexes (e.g., the Met's Costume Institute, MoMA's Applied Design exhibition), private museums (e.g,, the Lucas museum), "cultural" museums (e.g., the Smithsonian), smaller regional museums, etc. And, the art will be donated, like the videogames (no, MoMA didn't buy them) and the Lesser collection of pulp/illustration art (as you saw, Lesser not only donated his art, but also wrote a 7-figure check to the museum to care for it).

[Bronty]

Man I didn't realize that running a museum was such a racket

 

It sounds like (is?) the buying and selling of institutionalized ego stroking

[adamstrange]

Man I didn't realize that running a museum was such a racket

 

It sounds like (is?) the buying and selling of institutionalized ego stroking

Rogues' Gallery: The Secret Story of the Lust, Lies, Greed, and Betrayals That Made the Metropolitan Museum of Art linky

[Bronty]

Okay, okay I will go buy it when I have a free moment

[Terry Doyle]

London's Science Museum at South Kensington, which bought the original comic-book artwork it displays (for its own permanent collection) also commissioned Frank Hampson (creator of the Dan Dare strip) to produce two huge murals for the museum during the 1970s.

 

I have photos that I'll upload tomorrow . . .

 

The Science Museum is one of the three major museums on Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. The museum is a major London tourist attraction, attracting 2.7 million visitors annually

[Sharkey]

Pop Chicago Gallery, a gallery of pop artists (mostly Lichtenstein and Warhol style artists, but lots of comic related imagery)

 

Just walked by this today in Wicker Park. Prices are relatively inexpensive -- from a couple hundred to a few thousand bucks. Interesting stuff. Personally it smacks way too much of art school copying of Lichy and Warhol, but I do like to see comic-related pop art.

[Nexus]

thats akin to my argument... times change, The people making their preferences known are not the same people who came before them. Young(er) people's tastes change the world... we are seeing it everyday in all media. And we have seen it in collectibles Im not saying that OA will surpass or eclipse "real fine art", or that it should... merely that further inroads may be paved by the generations that have grown up watching the current movies to a greater degree than we accomplished having grown up reading the funny books themselves. (reading the what, grampa?)

 

the best part for me if anyone who disagrees with this, is, I dont really care, since I dont collect OA. But I see the possibility. Im not promoting anything for my benefit.

 

And, speaking personally, I really don't care if this hobby receives recognition by the masses in order to help validate my own collecting passion.

 

I`ve never understood why so many collectors are so desperate for validation from the mainstream. Not just in OA. Comic collectors in general treat comic book movie success as their holy grail. It`s like they believe that they`ll now be allowed to sit with the cool kids in the high school cafeteria.

 

Ha, that's probably it right there. Personally, I agree with Terry. Absolutely. I do enjoy viewing OA in a gallery or museum setting, but whether or not comic art is ever exhibited in a "real" museum, gains acceptance outside the hobby, etc., means very little to me. That's not why I collect.

 

Just to be clear, my discussion in this thread is strictly academic. As well, I don't see anyone else here wishing that this hobby was something it isn't. Maybe I'm missing it, but I don't think so.

[Bronty]

Yeah, Dan Forman said it best when he said that comic OA isn't fine art, its better

[Nexus]

Like it or not,this is probably much more in line with what could potentially happen with OCA and museum collections.in terms of being part of any type of permanent collection or display, It would be placed in a design or illustration sub-wing.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/03/momas-video-game-obsession-art-design_n_3529933.html?utm_hp_ref=arts

 

VIDEO GAMES?? In a museum? A prestigious one, no less?? HAHAHAHA!!! C'mon, that's gotta be a mistimed April Fool's joke. Something so common, lowbrow, and "kid's stuff" like video games could NEVER be elevated to "art". This is just someone's ridiculous rainbows/unicorns/peace-in-the-Middle-East fantasy.

 

Video games at MoMA...the basis for a good prank should be at least somewhat plausible...sheesh.

 

( )

[Bronty]

An outrage!!!! Who's responsible for this!!!

 

For what its worth there have been quite a few such video game exhibits at the smithsonian and other museums of late. Anyways, I keep waiting for the phone to ring and for MoMA or the smithsonian to be on the other end of the line but so far, nothing

 

If I had the means to start a museum I would just call it the "Museum of Interesting Artifacts" I mean WTF cares if something is "art" or not. I'm more interested personally in whether something is relevant or not. I'd rather discuss/ analyze / view interesting and relevant "lowbrow" artifacts than terrible/derivative/uninteresting/irrelevant "highbrow" artifacts any day. At the end of the day "art" is just a word.

 

Of course, if one started such a museum, we'd probably be having arguments over whether something qualifies as an "artifact" or not

[Bronty]

so common, lowbrow, and "kid's stuff"

 

Based on a post I read earlier today, I'm inclined to think the artspeak term is or will be... populist

 

 

[delekkerste]

VIDEO GAMES?? In a museum? A prestigious one, no less?? HAHAHAHA!!! C'mon, that's gotta be a mistimed April Fool's joke. Something so common, lowbrow, and "kid's stuff" like video games could NEVER be elevated to "art". This is just someone's ridiculous rainbows/unicorns/peace-in-the-Middle-East fantasy.

 

Video games at MoMA...the basis for a good prank should be at least somewhat plausible...sheesh.

 

( )

 

 

In all seriousness, (1) this is part of a temporary exhibition and (2) it's part of the Architecture and Design wing. If you've been to the A&D wing at MoMA, you'll see iPads, appliances and various household objects. This isn't in any way MoMA elevating Pac-Man to the level of Pollocks and Picassos any more than it is elevating the silverware and office furniture on display in the A&D wing as well.

 

You'll also notice that the curator says she is explicitly focusing on the coding and design of the videogames while removing the arcade surroundings and the nostalgia component. Doesn't bode well for capes & tights ever being taken seriously as fine art.

[Nexus]

VIDEO GAMES?? In a museum? A prestigious one, no less?? HAHAHAHA!!! C'mon, that's gotta be a mistimed April Fool's joke. Something so common, lowbrow, and "kid's stuff" like video games could NEVER be elevated to "art". This is just someone's ridiculous rainbows/unicorns/peace-in-the-Middle-East fantasy.

 

Video games at MoMA...the basis for a good prank should be at least somewhat plausible...sheesh.

 

( )

 

 

In all seriousness, (1) this is part of a temporary exhibition and (2) it's part of the Architecture and Design wing. If you've been to the A&D wing at MoMA, you'll see iPads, appliances and various household objects. This isn't in any way MoMA elevating Pac-Man to the level of Pollocks and Picassos any more than it is elevating the silverware and office furniture on display in the A&D wing as well.

 

You'll also notice that the curator says she is explicitly focusing on the coding and design of the videogames while removing the arcade surroundings and the nostalgia component. Doesn't bode well for capes & tights ever being taken seriously as fine art.

 

I should hope not! I can only take so much. At least those other vulgarities are kept separate so as not to sully the purity of the true masterpieces.

 

 

*sniff*

 

[Bronty]

VIDEO GAMES?? In a museum? A prestigious one, no less?? HAHAHAHA!!! C'mon, that's gotta be a mistimed April Fool's joke. Something so common, lowbrow, and "kid's stuff" like video games could NEVER be elevated to "art". This is just someone's ridiculous rainbows/unicorns/peace-in-the-Middle-East fantasy.

 

Video games at MoMA...the basis for a good prank should be at least somewhat plausible...sheesh.

 

( )

 

 

In all seriousness, (1) this is part of a temporary exhibition and (2) it's part of the Architecture and Design wing. If you've been to the A&D wing at MoMA, you'll see iPads, appliances and various household objects. This isn't in any way MoMA elevating Pac-Man to the level of Pollocks and Picassos

 

I certainly agree that pacmans and picassos (or paul smiths for that matter) shouldn't be exhibited together, but I don't even think elevating is really the right term (although its the one commonly used). I think "grouping" is more appropriate. I mean in all seriousness what makes a pollock drip painting any "better" than a cutting edge building by one of the world's top architects or an exquisite piece of antique jewelry by a top maker or even a landmark game like pacman or super mario bros. In my mind, nothing. They were all cutting edge in their own way in their respective fields, and I think it cheapens the accomplishments in other fields to say they might be "elevated" to art.

 

This is not to pick on what you said, I just posted because "elevation" has often been inferred or implied in this discussion and I just don't buy into it personally. Like you said earlier we should just appreciate things for what they are instead of trying to blur the lines.

 

[adamstrange]

thats akin to my argument... times change, The people making their preferences known are not the same people who came before them. Young(er) people's tastes change the world... we are seeing it everyday in all media. And we have seen it in collectibles Im not saying that OA will surpass or eclipse "real fine art", or that it should... merely that further inroads may be paved by the generations that have grown up watching the current movies to a greater degree than we accomplished having grown up reading the funny books themselves. (reading the what, grampa?)

 

the best part for me if anyone who disagrees with this, is, I dont really care, since I dont collect OA. But I see the possibility. Im not promoting anything for my benefit.

 

And, speaking personally, I really don't care if this hobby receives recognition by the masses in order to help validate my own collecting passion.

 

I`ve never understood why so many collectors are so desperate for validation from the mainstream. Not just in OA. Comic collectors in general treat comic book movie success as their holy grail. It`s like they believe that they`ll now be allowed to sit with the cool kids in the high school cafeteria.

 

It's completely opposite from what you are saying.

 

We want the cool kids to beg to join the nerd table.

[thethedew]

...If I had the means to start a museum I would just call it the "Museum of Interesting Artifacts"

 

We've already got one of those, Bronty. Called the Smithsonian Institution...

[Terry Doyle]

London's Science Museum at South Kensington, which bought the original comic-book artwork it displays (for its own permanent collection) also commissioned Frank Hampson (creator of the Dan Dare strip) to produce two huge murals for the museum during the 1970s.

 

I have photos that I'll upload tomorrow . . .

 

The Science Museum is one of the three major museums on Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. The museum is a major London tourist attraction, attracting 2.7 million visitors annually

 

Here are photographs of the two murals London's prestigious Science Museum commissioned comic-strip artist Frank Hampson to create for it during the 1970s (they form part of the museum's permanent collection, bought and paid for, along with various comic-book originals of the Dan Dare strip).

 

 

As the photos perhaps suggest, these are huge originals - taller than a man!

 

 

Science Museum, South Kensington, United Kingdom

 

 

[tth2]

thats akin to my argument... times change, The people making their preferences known are not the same people who came before them. Young(er) people's tastes change the world... we are seeing it everyday in all media. And we have seen it in collectibles Im not saying that OA will surpass or eclipse "real fine art", or that it should... merely that further inroads may be paved by the generations that have grown up watching the current movies to a greater degree than we accomplished having grown up reading the funny books themselves. (reading the what, grampa?)

 

the best part for me if anyone who disagrees with this, is, I dont really care, since I dont collect OA. But I see the possibility. Im not promoting anything for my benefit.

 

And, speaking personally, I really don't care if this hobby receives recognition by the masses in order to help validate my own collecting passion.

 

I`ve never understood why so many collectors are so desperate for validation from the mainstream. Not just in OA. Comic collectors in general treat comic book movie success as their holy grail. It`s like they believe that they`ll now be allowed to sit with the cool kids in the high school cafeteria.

 

It's completely opposite from what you are saying.

 

We want the cool kids to beg to join the nerd table.

 

Either way, it`s not gonna happen, no matter if every comic book movie grosses $2 billion from now on and Charles Saatchi, Eli Broad and Steve Cohen suddenly start buying up all Kirby OA.

 

But it still raises the question why so many people on these boards are so desperate to get the endorsement of the cool kids (whether being invited to their table or being begged to be allowed to join the nerd table)? Seriously, people, it`s time to get over your adolescent inferiority complexes.