Posted on 12/23/2005 3:42:16 AM PST by NapkinUser
Vienna: Original watercolor paintings by Adolf Hitler are going for a few thousand euros (dollars) on the Austrian page of the auction website eBay, press reports said Wednesday.
A painting titled "Muenchen," (Munich) bearing the signature of the former Nazi dictator and described by the seller as a "rarity", was put up for auction on Monday at an asking price of 2,100 euros (2,495 dollars) on eBay.at
Another watercolor by Hitler, titled "Bad Gastein," received at least 25 bids before selling for more than 4,500 euros (5,340 dollars) on Tuesday, according to the daily Der Standard.
Austrian-born Hitler famously had ambitions to become an artist and was turned down by the Vienna Academy of Fine Arts, before leading the Nazi Party to power in Germany in 1933.
His production of paintings and sketches was prolific but experts see little artistic merit in them and major auction-houses shy away from them because of their author's bloodstained career.
the world could have avoided much pain and suffering had Hitler not had his "Bad Gastein" problem.
His paintings were as bad as his politics.
To me it is interesting that his signature is completely different to the one he used as Reichskanzler. I had the "privilege" to see some original documents that were signd by Hitler in his later years. Probably (if it is really authentic) a tasteless scrawl of his younger years. Therefore it would be quite typical.
You know.....like Hitler not being admitted to the Vienna Fine Arts Academy....it has been said that Castro probably would not have been a revolutionary, had a Major League Baseball team given him a contract.
His hatred for the Jews especially and also Christians came right out of Hell itself. What he really hated was God, and that was inspired by evil itself.
I always like to point out that the Third Reich is just one of many atrocities that have been foisted onto the world thanks to art critics.
i have seen a book with many of his artworks in them, actually, i think his art is pretty good. regardless of his evil, i can state his art is good with no trouble.
...no doubt...but if they had the democrats and hollywood back then that we do now...Hitler would have been praised for his artistic talent and brilliance as a "freedom" fighter and pleas would have gone out from hollywood for Hitler to be eligible for a pulitzer prize...
What that guy on the pillar doing - is that Bill and Monica?
Yeah, I was wondering the same thing..
The painting is a lot better than I could do...it looks like the work of a moderately talented amatuer who paints for their own amusement or, perhaps sells his stuff of local scenes to tourists as they walk around town.
"experts see little artistic merit in them "
If it doesn't look like it was painted by an orangutan in estrus, it ain't art to an expert.
I'd take Adolph's attempt at representation before most of the masturbation-on-canvas you see today.
Art ping.
Let Sam Cree, Woofie or me know if you want on or off the ping list.
I always like to point out that the Third Reich is just one of many atrocities that have been foisted onto the world thanks to art critics.
So what other atrocities did you have in mind on this scale? There are thousands, if not tens of thousands, of artists rejected from art schools, exhibitions, etc. It comes with the territory. The result is not to name other artists' work "degenerate," burn it, and to destroy other people's lives in the bargain.
The same can be said of Castro. Are we supposed to take any crazy man into art schools and onto sports teams so they won't kill others in the future?
Hitler's art was mediocre. I think Churchill's art was a bit better, but I'm glad he is better known for his courage as a statesman instead. It is nonetheless interesting how Churchill pursued art for most of his life, as a hobby.
Sorry I did not see this thread a couple of days ago. I was buried under exams and projects to grade.
LOL!
I thought the same thing but didn't have the nerve to call attention to it.
I didn't say that all atrocies foisted on us by art critics have equaled the horrors of the Third Reich. However, Jackson Pollock comes darn close. Here's an amusing article about a few other contenders: http://www.enquirer.com/editions/1999/10/10/loc_if_thats_art_im.html
From the limited example on this thread, Hitler definitely had a better handle on perspective. Churchill's remind me of folk art, Hitler's of a Barvarian Thomas Kincade.
Maybe it's a metaphor for the Fatherland and France.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
