my paper is not so much disappointed, but very surprised, but for other reasons. First, it is not clear about what the author writes: either he wants to speculate on the causes of high prices of Klimt, or to speak about the exhibition in Liverpool. Once connected it had not happened - the concept of the exhibition does not explain the 135 million paid for the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer ... He's right, for example, that Klimt did not commit a "breakthrough" or a revolution in art. But he became a hallmark of Viennese Art Nouveau ... And why, actually, it should be put on a par with Picasso or, God forgive me, Bacon?? It's just a very talented artist-designer, whose work will be to any decor and good that someone does not mind paying for the work with a perfect provenance 135 million. Actually, everything here to be honest: the collector pays not for the "idea", not for "a new word in art" in the abstract, but for the quality of painting ...
|