[hunter112]

Art sucks, and this little kid showed us a thing or two about its lack of value.

While I deplore his actions, you're unquestionably right. Let the artsy-fartsy types explain why this paint splotch is worth a full $1.5 mil!

[Rembrandt_fan]

You wrote, "Let the artsy-fartsy types explain why this paint splotch is worth a full $1.5 mil!"

Here's a short explanation for you: Frankenthaler's work is important and beautiful, and 'The Bay'--necessarily unique since she made no identical copies that I know of--is one of the most representative pieces of her mature style. A more market-oriented explanation would be simply 'supply and demand', since knowledgeable appraisers think $1.5 million is what a given private or public collector or concern would gladly pay to own that particular piece. In an economic sense, art is like any other commodity. Sometimes prices on newer works are either grossly inflated or underestimated, but pieces by proven masters such as Frankenthaler always increase in value over time.

[Republicanprofessor]

Also see post 143.

[rollo tomasi]

"Let the artsy-fartsy types explain why this paint splotch is worth a full $1.5 mil!"

Subjective Theory of Value

One thinks it is worth $1.5 million, creates the illusion, and sells it at that price. Then some dude buys it for $1.5 million, ain't capitalism grand.