How "seriously" is OA taken by the mainstream art world? 0

[Rick2you2]

1 hour ago, vodou said:

In the Americas. Completely opposite in Europe. That continent has a lot of problems, definitely of their own making, but re: comics as art...they got that right. In practice and follow-through.

Well, of course it is art; but is it “fine art”? Decorative pottery isn’t sculpture, either, but it is also art. Just recognized earlier as such.
And no, I don’t think the fine art world pays us much heed. They consider graphitti to be art, yet don’t take OA seriously. 

[delekkerste]

20 hours ago, miraclemet said:

I think some of the "downgrading" done towards comic book art is that it is production art, ie it is created as part of a process (in other words it is not art for arts sake), and is not the finished product (the comic book being the finished product). Obviously commissions and other pieced not done for the purpose of publication would not fall under this umbrella (though may get lumped in due to it being the same subject matter). 

I dont hold this opinion, but I've heard it said. 

I think the production aspect is a big hurdle to overcome, but, so is the collaborative nature of the creative process.  A John Byrne X-Men page...how much of its appeal is down to Chris Claremont's scripts [narrator: A LOT]?  How much credit goes to Austin [narrator:  also a lot]? How much credit goes to what Wein & Cockrum did to revamp the X-Men?  How much to Lee & Kirby and the other creators who got the title to the point where Byrne could do his thing?  It's a very different framework than most other artwork. 

That's why, to the extent that comic art has crossed over into mainstream art world respectability, it's been mostly "auteurs" who both wrote & drew their own creations (e.g., strip artists like Herriman and underground & indie artists like Crumb and Clowes).  To some extent, those who largely helped create the Marvel Universe (e.g., Kirby, Ditko) and those who made existing creations their own (e.g., Frank Miller on Daredevil and Batman) have perhaps achieved some measure of auteur-like respectability as well.  Though, I've spent a lot of time around the NYC art scene and I think the respectability that OA gets is more for being its own provincial/parochial thing; I don't think most people think of comics/comic art as being on the same civilization-defining (in their minds) peak of human creativity as whatever type of art they are into (some/much of which is quite bad, of course!)

Anyway, let's face it, the fine art world will never care about things like the 1st appearance of Wolverine page or 99%+ of mainstream comic art.  The words, "Oooh, cool Sal Buscema page" will never be uttered by a museum curator.  It's just a totally different thing, and that's just fine.  

Edited December 5, 2019 by delekkerste

[miraclemet]

2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

I think the production aspect is a big hurdle to overcome, but, so is the collaborative nature of the creative process.  A John Byrne X-Men page...how much of its appeal is down to Chris Claremont's scripts [narrator: A LOT]?  How much credit goes to Austin [narrator:  also a lot]? How much credit goes to what Wein & Cockrum did to revamp the X-Men?  How much to Lee & Kirby and the other creators who got the title to the point where Byrne could do his thing?  It's a very different framework than most other artwork. 

 

Good point on the collaborative nature of the art... 

 

I wonder if the assembly line approach was done for purely efficency needs, or if it was also to breakup ownership so no one could claim ownership other than the publisher of the art. 

Like sure Simon drew Captain America, but someone else inked him, someone else colored him, some one else put words in his mouth, so who has any substantial claim on him other than the publisher? 

[glendgold]

Comic artwork is done for commercial reasons, which sullies the deep purity of the fine art market mindset.  (Insert irony emoji here.)  I think fine art looks at arguments for the legitimacy of our hobby -- at best -- as it would for the legitimacy of bbq or drive ins.  Not art, but sure, if you want to claim it really *is* art, they will at least think the idea is cute.

 

 

Edited December 5, 2019 by glendgold

[adamstrange]

On 12/4/2019 at 2:21 PM, NewCollector101 said:

Is OA generally considered fine art and taken seriously by the art world, or is it thought of as something lesser? My sense is that it's considered sort of provincial, but I don't know (just to be clear, I don't share this opinion).

On a scale of 1 to 10, comic art is, at best, a -7,000,000 to the fine art world.

[vodou]

Just now, adamstrange said:

On a scale of 1 to 10, comic art is, at best, a -7,000,000 to the fine art world.

Part of the problem is we've already run it up so much. (Not a new idea, I think Gene first mentioned that on this board a few years ago.)

Most 'new categorical entries' to the fine art world (self-taught, street art, etc) can be introduced on the cheap (from the dealer pov) but turned out for decent money (aka fat roi) to ignorant but curious collectors. None of that meat remains on the bone for comic art. Nobody is paying more for McNutsack Spidey than whoever Metropolis was fronting for that day. Where's the fine art leverage as incentive to enter?

[ESeffinga]

Well there is the Art Basel banana...

i.e. The modern fine art market has little to do with meat on any bone, and more to do with people just being insane.

And if you don’t know what banana I’m talking about, Google that mess, but make sure you are in the mood.

[NC101]

2 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

Well there is the Art Basel banana...

i.e. The modern fine art market has little to do with meat on any bone, and more to do with people just being insane.

And if you don’t know what banana I’m talking about, Google that mess, but make sure you are in the mood.

I have nothing but respect for anyone who could sell that for $150,000 

[delekkerste]

17 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

Well there is the Art Basel banana...

i.e. The modern fine art market has little to do with meat on any bone, and more to do with people just being insane.

And if you don’t know what banana I’m talking about, Google that mess, but make sure you are in the mood.

Overheard this week*: "I'd rather have the Cattelan banana than the Killing Joke page that sold in the last Heritage auction." 

 

 

 

 

 

*OK, it was me !  I mean, I'd frame the certificate of authenticity and then hang up fresh duct-taped bananas next to it periodically. It would be delightfully absurd and would make me smile constantly. But, then again, I am a Cattelan fan: 

[BCarter27]

1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

Cattelan fan

Admit it... you stole the toilet.

[Rick2you2]

19 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

Well there is the Art Basel banana...

i.e. The modern fine art market has little to do with meat on any bone, and more to do with people just being insane.

And if you don’t know what banana I’m talking about, Google that mess, but make sure you are in the mood.

It's not about the banana. It's for lovers of fruit flies.

Apparently, he sold two more of them.

[NC101]

3 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

It's not about the banana. It's for lovers of fruit flies.

Apparently, he sold two more of them.

Gotta unload 'em before they go bad...

[batman_fan]

Until you see a Hedge Fund Manager paying 8 to 9 figure for a Liefeld Captain America page, it isn't being taken seriously.

[ESeffinga]

1 hour ago, NewCollector101 said:

Gotta unload 'em before they go bad...

This is “fine art” we’re talking about here. It works the opposite of comic book land. They don’t discount the closer they get to the end of the show. In fact if they sell one, the next available costs more. They had 3. The first went for 120k. The last went for $150k.

Because if you are gonna pay a crazy amount for a banana duct taped to a wall, that will never make it home with you while still “fresh”, wouldn’t you at least want the honor of knowing you paid the MOST for said banana?

[grapeape]

Fine art or comic art I could give a toss about being accepted into a club. I saw these and knew what they were. The first is a Rembrandt which I had the pleasure to view in Balboa Park, San Diego. The second, an ASM Sal Buscema page.

Though a few dollars may separate them as far as FMV, I love them equally for the sake of art!

Rembrandt at the Timken Museum of Art
Buscema currently at C-Link

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2019 by grapeape

[glendgold]

Why are  we worrying about whether these guys take our hobby seriously?  What would "seriously" look like? 

Oh.

 

[grapeape]

7 minutes ago, glendgold said:

Why are  we worrying about whether these guys take our hobby seriously?  What would "seriously" look like? 

Oh.

 

CGC boardie grapeape shocked the art world by eating the $120,000 banana and replacing it with a Sal Buscema Hulk page.

[Varanis]

I think @delekkerste made a good point that comic art being production art has been a big hurdle for it. Yet I find it fascinating that fine art struggles so much to find purpose that some of the most emblematic modern works are those that are destroyed. I think one could argue that comic art being the catalyst for the world's largest movie franchises gives it far more purpose than that which fine art is struggling to find. Essentially, in a world where art is struggling to have purpose, comic art seems to have a shorter road to the top than a banana duct taped to a wall.

[zhamlau]

1 hour ago, grapeape said:

CGC boardie grapeape shocked the art world by eating the $120,000 banana and replacing it with a Sal Buscema Hulk page.

They probably would love it...those degenerate fools...

[grapeape]

53 minutes ago, zhamlau said:

They probably would love it...those degenerate fools...

🍌= Art

Banning Sal=ARTSOC

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears, It was their final, most essential command.”

 

Edited December 8, 2019 by grapeape