About 20 years ago, someone wrote an opinion piece in the International Herald Tribune headlined "Who put the 'con' in contemporary art?"
10
Well, I come from Alabama with my banjo on my knee
And I'm bound for Louisiana, my true love for to see
Well, it rained all night the day I left
The weather it was dry
The sun so hot I froze myself
Banana don't you cry
Oh! Banana, oh don't you cry for me
Well, I come from Alabama with my banjo on my knee
I had a dream the other night
When everything was still
I dreamed I saw Banana
She was coming down the hill
A red, red rose was in her mouth
A tear was in her eye
Said I come from Alabama
Now, Banana don't you cry
Oh! Banana, don't you cry for me
Well, I come from Alabama with my banjo on my knee
Well, I come from Alabama with my banjo on my knee
The land of Louisiana is where I want to be
2
The only "(grudging)" I saw was in the headline.
And, wow, the apologia was academic and predictable. Yeah, no, this guy is not brave and bold because he is "willing to implicate himself". That is putting lipstick on a pig. Which is less of a cliche than a banana taped to a wall.
7
Cattelan gets to claim he is implicating himself in the flaws of the art world right up to the moment he cashes the check.
4
And now a word about our world's starving children and how many we could feed with $120,000.
5
"Compelling artist?"
I used to say with great pride that my life in the arts has made a positive difference in a troubled world. I no longer feel that way, and this article, its author, and the conversation around this 1%er gambit simply makes me sick.
When I reflect on all the great artists I know, the sacrifices they have made, and the modest recognition they have received for lifetime of heart-felt effort, it seems to me that the contemporary art world in which I am a participant has debased itself beyond redemption.
The motivation here is simple and no different than working for Exxon - fame and money - the holy grail of a sick society.
As one other commenter wrote, this "celebration of idiocy and decadence borders on the disgraceful."
10
Often art is not just "art," it's a lifestyle. Not in that order. Usually one falls in love with the "culture" before the "art." You an go to any major city in the country and find hip art spaces full of white walls with random attached objects and performance art. There is usually a restaurant nearby, a brewpub and some apartments. They will have monthly art walks, poetry slams, short story readings, etc. They are interesting and fun hubs. If this is your thing, anyone can be an "artist." You simply need to label yourself as such and come up with a shtick. You will find some truly talented painters, potters, glass workers and the like, but they are often found in other locales. At the hip, modern art, hub you find a lot of people attaching random objects attached to white walls. Right or wrong, they are artists and this is their world. The lifestyle also breeds a bit of celebrity. A duct taped banana by any random artist in any of these cities will draw little to no attention. Duct tape,object and a wall -- it's been done before, many times. But by the "right" artist, it is something more.
Re-reading this...I did not intend for this to come across as such a harsh critique. I actually like these places and go often. But it is fact nonetheless.
2
Mr. Farago says, “I feel a little hesitant delivering a critical judgment about a work I haven’t seen in person.”
But, since the even the artist has acknowledged that the banana is freely replaceable – and the duct tape must be also, since it will soon wear out – why doesn’t Mr. Farago tape a banana to his wall with duct tape and contemplate it?
Who is to say any banana duct-taped to a wall isn’t an “authentic” Cattelan sculpture? If the banana and tape are both replaceable, what kinds of tests will the experts perform, if the work is stolen and recovered, to determine whether the recovered banana and duct tape is “authentic”? At least in many of Banksy’s sculptures, an original wall somewhere specific is part of the piece. Here, we just have a non-specific banana and generic tape.
I was rather hoping that Mr. Farago’s piece was an arch and ironic joke, signaled by his quoting Banksy: “I Can’t Believe You Morons Actually Buy This ….”, but I suppose he means to be taken seriously. Perhaps next he will review the recipe for Stone Soup…BYOB (bring your own banana).
1
Someone paid an artist $120,000 for a banana duct taped to a wall.
That’s the story.
That someone duct taped a banana to a wall, and the rationale and brevity behind it, isn’t particularly interesting at all.
Find the buyer. Ask them why they paid $120,000 instead of $1.98. I’d be interested in that explanation!!!
75
There is a long history of bananas taped to walls. In the Greek period, artists used twine to affix them to walls. The Romans used the same grout they used for mosaics to make a secure join. It wasn't until the Renaissance, when tape was invented, that the more modern method began to be used. Bernini taped a banana to the south pillar of his baldachin in St. Peter's, but it was found to interfere with midnight mass so it was removed to an unknown location. The Impressionists tended to prefer older bananas that were mottled with darker spots, while Jackson Pollack once smashed a banana onto a canvas. Calder's mobile with bananas included a peach.
6
"Calder's mobile with bananas included a peach."
No one could write satire like that without knowing some actual art history. :-)
3
I just made 15 canvases with 15 different banana types from plantains to lady fingers. Also used color duct tape which adds a beautiful aura. I also took the liberty of adding anti-rot enamel which should preserve the bananas for years. I am selling the entire lot except for the one I placed on my dining room for just 200k and includes banana replacements for life. I am moving to mangoes and zip ties next, get them while they are fresh!
4
Come to Denver, CO, to learn the "right" way to hang a banana on the wall, from Yoshitomo Saito, a longtime Denver bronze sculptor of note who shows in this city and in San Francisco. "Yoshi" creates amusing, charming, and stunning cast bronze bananas, as well as pine cones, cottonwood twigs, pineapples, and other edibles and vegetation. His bananas, or more properly, banana peels, are arrayed on a wall in soaring patinated patterns. And ... they cannot be eaten.
Although best known for his Colorado Hoops, gracefully curved standing circles of overlapping bamboo-in-bronze made in his own foundry, Saito has in recent years branched out into larger and larger hoops, giant bronze fish nets, fish traps, and amusing artistic take-offs on brooms and shovels. Even though made of cast and welded metal, the works have a light, airy quality that seem to float in their space, be it in museums, galleries, or one's home.
2
In college, I took an art history class. taught by an artist. He showed us a wide range of modern art, and was adamant that the definition has no bounds. If the creator calls it art, we simply don't know enough to say otherwise.
He was equally emphatic that the label "Art" confers no inherent value or status -- and that only a small percentage of the art objects in galleries were of any interest at all. "Is it interesting and engaging ?" was his constant question. If not, don't waste your time.
Anyone can rail at the absurdity and decadence of a duct-taped banana. Let's recall that the world of Contemporary Art is not simply high-priced entertainment for the rich. Every day, thousands of artists labor in obscurity to create something of interest and consequence. Much of their work is inspiring, sometimes mind-blowing. Go to a house concert of new music, a gallery (or café) that displays artistic photographs, or a modern dance performance. Invest some time, and you'll be dazzled by the creativity, seriousness, and profundity of living artists. They crave your engagement more than your money -- everyone wins when you give good attention to something that is provocative and worthwhile..
Leave the banana on the wall for those with nothing better to admire.
5
@JSH
Thank you for this comment. It is very good guidance, and very well said.
You are hereby nominated for recognition by Big Banana Entertainment (1) with the first annual Purple Banana (1) award.
(1) Trademark pending
1
The key to Jason Farago's error, the thing that makes him unable to actually defend this work as art, lies in his use of "we." The "we" that exists in the very few auction houses and tiny number of art galleries that participate in this particular art market is infinitesimally small.
Almost every other art form -- dance, theater, music, literature -- has a larger audience that participates in judging the work, whether by buying tickets or borrowing books at the library or streaming. Only contemporary visual art exists in this closed set of rooms, whose gatekeepers would all fit into small lecture hall.
The commenters here and elsewhere are not part of the "we" that will question "our certainties" in light of Mr. Cattelan's work. We, the "we" outside of Art Basel, Art Basel Miami Beach, Documenta, Saatchi, Pace, Gagosian, etc. see very clearly that this art is not meant for us to look at or to own, was never meant to speak to us, and is curated by people for whom our existence is an interesting theoretical concept. We exist in a place where no art can be made. We are too backward, provincial, uninformed, unaware, and worst of all unwealthy. We've never even had an (unpaid) internship in the halls of real art. Farago just piped up to remind us of that.
6
The employment of obscure politico-philosophic theories and metaphysics to justify what is in fact a prank reminds me of an old Greek philosopher who chided a curious pupil by instructing him that wisdom is understanding the difference between what is worth knowing and what is not. Any defense of Cattelan's banana that exists is not worth knowing.
These aesthetically frivolous or cynical knick-knacks proliferate in the art world for the ultra-wealthy for whom paying mere $120,000 for a chuckle is like losing a $5 bet. It is morally repellent. It is not so much a purchase as a public, egoistic statement of contempt for anyone who cannot afford to burn money. It speaks to the decadence, not of our culture, but to the very public decadence and arrogance of the One percent that support it.
An argument for a 70% marginal tax rate on the ultra-wealthy could not find a better home.
8
'... the title “Comedian” is ironic ...'
OK, but the work could be understood without a title. Indeed, some artists choose to reject titles by using "Untitled" as the title.
The problem with titles is that they impose an interpretation on the viewer, although some artists might use a title to make a "point", and that could be the case here.
However, other titles are purely explanatory. Indeed, some artists are so determined to "explain" themselves that they supply an artist's statement that is displayed next to the work. Thus, the artist becomes his or her own critic.
1
@JTN
Or it’s just an explanation of their work. You know, sometimes a banana is just a banana.
Cattelan is nothing new under the sun. The french artist Yves Klien in the 1950's did sell "imaginary" landscapes. One instance that I know of went as follow: The artist and the collector did meet on the banks of the river Seine, there the artist would choose a particular spot and would "sell" the view for a agreed price which was to be produced, not in cash but in the equivalent in gold. Once the artist and collector each finished the "purchase" each one would toss the gold and the contract (after taring it up) in the river and then check hands.
All this was recorded by photos or film (no video at the time)
Cattelan could have done the same, the buyer eats the banana and the artist burns the cash... still very good publicity, but how about poor Perrotin?
1
"Cattelan could have done the same, ..."
"Cattelan could have done" a lot of things, but hypothetical alternatives are only useful for understanding what he chose NOT to do.
For example, why didn't Cattelan mount the work on a board and display it in a frame under glass?
If this incident doesn't convince you that modern art is a joke and its adherents fools, then nothing will.
1
If the artist had no name. This event would not exist.
2
Will Mr. Farago soon be returning from his vacation to his work as an art critic?
1
How pathetic and a joke the "art world" has become, so stop wasting our time and press space!
2
If you have any understanding of art history Mr. Cattalan's work fits neatly in the thread. Sturtevant upended art and she is still misunderstood. Art today is about thinking, it has been since Duchamp. The hubris around Cattalan's provocations inhibit thinking in the small minded but it is not hard to see that what we ascribe a word or idea to in the world doesn't necessarily attach itself perfectly. There are slippages, slides of meaning that result in the readymade, the banana as art. Art is an idea created by humans, it is malleable.
As Richard Rorty said,
The world does not speak. Only we do. The world can, once we have programmed ourselves with a language, cause us to hold beliefs. But it cannot propose a language for us to speak …
3
In the parlance of contemporary art today this work is profoundly conservative and somewhat retardataire. It is a recapitulation of Duchamp's readymade. Koons did the same with the New series, vacuums in plexiglas display cases. Cause célèbre is a handy one in todays contemporary art media toolkit. It reminds me of a comment of a friend made about Egypt: the tourists at least know what to point their cameras at. The changeableness of the term art has subjected it to disfiguring attributions in the service of scandal. It does once again prove that we use a word to mean something but that doesn't mean it will remain immutable. We all love to hate a scoundrel even a benign capitalist contemporary artist. No one knows this more than Maurizio. Art in the media landscape today is one of effect, provocation. It also is a good joke.
2
@Gina Stoppina
“In the parlance of contemporary art today this work is profoundly conservative and somewhat” banana.
Please, if you are going to critique Banana, use must at least have studied the language of the Banana. I humbly submit my recommendation to its use above in your sentence.
Interesting that a rise can still be risen with a provocation so expected in this contemporary art landscape. People want to get their knickers in a knot. I'm not sure Maurizio is much a thinker in the philosophical arena as someone like Sturtevant but he is expert at pushing buttons in the media system of signifiers that ignite selfies and salacious salutations. Contemporary philosophical art is an exploration of how words can be deformed and deranged to expose our incomplete mastery of language. It has gotten away from us and we're upset. We don't like other people who change what we thought was permanent. Even if it was a joke.
3
Proof positive that there's too much art and too many artists. It's time to scale back a bit.
1
Not very convincing, but probably the best argument that could be made. Thanks for trying.
2
What evidence do you have that Banksy colluded with Sothebys?
It’s convenient that it was the last lot; hard to believe art handlers etc would not have noticed anything unusual in the work’s weight or armature; a couple other arguments that have escaped my memory because, as Jason points out, Banksy is culturally irrelevant
2
The writer looks at randomness- a trail of a slug, a banana taped to the wall- and infers meaning.
However since no two people can perceive the same message, was there a message at all? Or just the con job he refers to despairingly?
Ok here’s my take: anyone who pays $120,000 for this banana and duct tape, and faithfully replaces both every week, has made a joke of themselves; the ‘artist’ in getting the buyer to do something so ridiculous, is ‘The Comedian’ in the name of the ‘art.’
2
"... faithfully replaces both every week ..."
An employee would probably do the actual replacement. It's no different than having servants polish the silver.
2
The worst crime is that the piece - and everything around it - is boring. Even a guy eating it is boring. Someone paying $120,000 for it is boring. The internet fuss and the articles producing it will be - and are - boring. The only possible merit to the piece is that the artist might have intended to indirectly point out that the wealthy and all the fuss they collect around them like exited magnetized filings are insufferably, intolerably boring. But still... snore.
6
"... it is boring."
Then what do you consider to be "exciting" art? Please be specific.
You don't need to limit yourself to any particular period in time. Art history spans a period of about 30,000 years*, so you have plenty to choose from.
* Some of the prehistoric art in the Chauvet Cave in France has been dated to about 32,000 to 30,000 years ago.
Clever (grudging) defense in utilizing the conceptual trope of "suspension" to justify the artistic value and context of Mr. Catalan's "Comedian." Of course, the duck tape is more affixing than suspending the banana to the wall of Perrotin's booth at Art Basil Miami ... but hey ... you're also asking us to suspend reason to justify your nihilistic and cynical art world.
The "Frat-Boy" school of art that Mr. Catalan is vibrant member of certainly is in need of writers like you to insure that taped bananas can attain absurd monetary values. Thank you for gaslighting us.
4
I get that the artist genuinely may be making a statement duct taping a banana to a wall. The beauty of art is freedom of expresssion, and we don't have a right to judge what constitutes art in my opinion. It's where the money gets thrown in that it becomes something else and people get lost, and that in of itself may be an even more important statement.
1
@JJK
Seriously, it’s fascinating that an artist might imagine many statements, yet leave the interpretation to the audience - of which there are, thankfully, many more.
After all, very few people want to read an artist statement about Gros Michel, do some research, and imagine a variety of connections between duct tape and bananas that have enormous opportunities for social and economic commentary, as well as implications about civic duty and governance. It’s just so much more fun to slip on the banana.
Have fun viewing this work of art as a good (or bad, boring, etc) joke. Know too that one can see it as an invitation to view it with an eye that connects it to so much more.
For example, “slavery and bananas,” is a simple statement.
“Consumerism and technology” is also a simple statement. Together, these phrases can be interpreted as a statement about bondage. Is modern day slavery imposed by corporate slave holders an important and arguable concept? I would hope the majority of people would agree.
Jason Farago felt compelled to make a gratuitous attack on street artist Banksy in his defense of the obscene overvaluation of established artists within the gallery system; it should be noted that while he was fawning over this duct-taped banana as exemplary compared to what he regards as Banksy's "juvenile" art, Banksy was doing a new piece about homelessness for all the world to see for free (not just the jet-setting crowd that can afford 6-figure bananas and the sycophantic art critics that gape admiringly at their vulgar overprivileged lifestyles.)
7
there i was selling bananas on the corner for 25 cents each all these years...i just wish i'd come up with the whole duct tape thing...
4
@申
Shen, its all about the duct tape ...lol ...
there i was selling bananas on the corner for 25 cents each all these years...i just wish i'd come up with the whole duct tape thing...
I mean it's one banana, Michael. How much could it cost? $120,000?
1
Ah, but it got lots of attention and press coverage which is the name of the game in so many areas these days, the more outrageous and dumb, the better.
At least Banksy can make his own stencils and I don’t need a critc to explain them.
2
Society gets the art it deserves, as well as the government it deserves. No logic, no beauty, no truth, just foolishness and fools chasing after it.
4
At the very least, match the criticism of this Art with something novel and unique. Cattelan brought something new to the table - your comments could at least match the bar being set here.
So tired of the tired comments lamenting the state of the art market, that there could have been a "real" artist on that wall, that there are more pressing issues to address in the world, that this a waste of money, and the best of all - that this is NOT art.
Did you cut and paste an archived art review from 1922, 1958, 1977, 1994 or 2019 (Banksy)?? So smug, so lazy. USA anyone?
2
Any art students care to share what your professor's comments and grades would be if you turned this banana in as your thesis project ?
1
@JaneK
Jane, I actually think, just as studies in business school have taught about such marketing ploys, a PhD thesis could easily be constructed out of “Comedian.”
1. It has the element of provocation.
2. It requires the viewer to do the work.
3. In constructing meaning, the viewer “sells” the constructed meaning to h/h self, then turns it outward to a wider audience - every selfie-taking viewer did just that.
4. If a viewership is big enough on something controversial, it can shape opinions about culture, which influence how culture changes. And where the majority of opinions are intractable, that too is something very important to learn about a culture, which, depending on the subject and situation, without any art at all, can be an indication of something deeply troubling.
Note to self: Ship a crate of comedians to HRH in Saudi.
2
1) I think you are imposing a narrative on a mundane object, a tendency that appears to be endemic among the elite "art" critics.
2) I seriously doubt a female artist, or POC, or new artist could have drawn this much attention to something so mundane and unimaginative. This tells you all you need to know about whether this piece has real value or worth.
3) I wonder whether money laundering has a role to play in many if not most of these unreasonably expensive, and seemingly ridiculous, art sales.
3
@Evelyn
You needn't wonder. It does.
1
We can debate about whether it's a good joke (because of its relationship to the artist's prior work). But there's no doubt that it's an old joke. When Art just re-lives Duchamp over and over again, without moving a single person emotionally, Art is revealed as full of poseurs, inside or not.
@Dan
Duchamp. Still relevant today.
Income inequality has led to a grotesque distortion of values.
Useless and/or pricey luxury goods like this "art" leave ordinary people out of the mix.
Quality artists exist everywhere, but the status of something like this defiles the entire category.
Pure baloney! (Maybe I should submit some baloney, it might do better than a well-executed painting somebody would buy for a reasonable price and want to live with.)
1
Please, never close comments on this one. This is one big banana.
Note to self:
- Attainable art - for the masses!
- In the aggregate, worth vastly more the. $120,000.00.
- The civic educational “teaching moment” about consumption and the fragility of it when it’s not well researched and understood - reference to the Gros Michel (Big Mike)
- Everyone should have a cavendish taped to their wall.
- This is no talking fish!
- Consumable art (isn’t it all? Doesn’t it all deteriorate in the value of its meaning over time?).
So much to say, so few bananas...)
2
Since it was eaten, isn't it time to bring on the second banana?
1
I take solace in the fact that, if the owners actually display the piece and adhere to the artist's instructions to replace the fruit every 10 days or so, they will be confronted daily with the reminder of the fleeting nature of youth, ripeness, life, as each banana turns from golden, plump -- dare I say, priapic -- to wizened, flaccid mush.
Perhaps it will lead to some soul-searching about how best to use one's short time here on earth.
1
@Hildy Johnson
Or how to spend one's money.
Lucille needs to drink less and grocery shop more if she thinks a 50-cent banana costs $10: When Lucille Bluth, the doyenne of “Arrested Development,” said, “It’s one banana, Michael, what could it cost? Ten dollars?,” it turns out she was off by a factor of 10,000. Yes, on this occasion, and by a mere factor of 20 on every other.
I think too many people with their livelihoods intertwined with art are threatened by this one $120,000.00 banana. There is no shortage of people vested in the art world expressing their opinions (rather telling us, the minions) about what art is and is not. Should we be subdued by the brilliance of their intellect, education and decades of experience?
I am calling for revolution!
The Banana Revolt has begun!!
1
Maybe the art world has truly gone bananas?
1
What do you call a banana with no arms or legs stuck on a wall?
Art
1
A symptom of what is wrong is that Lucille Bluth's .... said, “It’s one banana, Michael, what could it cost? Ten dollars?"
The rest of us knows full well that a banana even in the most expensive snobbish store costs $1 and even less in a regular grocery store.
1
Too much writing about esoteric ideas...or actually, mere theories, and not enough writing about actual beauty, or how art moves us, or technique.
Writer is projecting. The artist is riding the wave of cheap absurdism (and making it expensive.)
3
I think Jason Farago needs to ask himself why such an overwhelming majority of commenters consider "Comedian" a fraud. These are, after all, New York Times readers who tend to be considerably more sophisticated about art than the average American. I think most of these readers are skeptical about conceptual art in general and lament that art in its traditional forms, as practiced for millennia, seems to have been abandoned at the highest reaches of the art world. I would be interested to see Mr. Farago undertake a serious assessment of conceptual art and its relationship with traditional forms.
5
"I would be interested to see Mr. Farago undertake a serious assessment of conceptual art and its relationship with traditional forms."
I posted a whole comment* that bypassed all that "conceptual art" stuff and concluded that the work can be indeed be seen as embodying "traditional forms".
Rather than repeat it, I will ask YOU to explain in literal terms the "forms" that can be found in the work. Here are some hints:
1. What is the "form" of the banana, the tape, and the wall?
2. What is the relationship between those "forms"?
* https://nyti.ms/2sRy5ub#permid=104045801
In retrospect, I overlooked an important component -- namely the colors.
1
@JTN
Awesome.
Doesn't art mostly becomes "art" when the artists says it is.
Had Mr. Cattelan said this is nothing more than 20 cent's worth of fruit and 2 cents worth of tape, it would have decreased in value by at least $119, 999.78.
However, one must remember that duct tape was one of the greatest inventions ever. Now it has been shown to be one of the most expensive products, at least by weight, ever developed.
2
Someday long after our civilization has collapsed (which may be soon), archaeologists will discover beautiful mansions with walls adorned with paintings and sculpture, perhaps lesser works, but the works of masters.
The will also find a piece of duct tape on a wall where such a painting might be expected. They will immediately assume that looters have stolen the painting that must have been there.
They will not suspect that all that hungry survivors took was a banana.
3
I my toddler painted something that even faintly resembled the work of Rembrandt, Van Gogh or Picasso, I would sign her up for art classes.
If she taped fruit to the wall, that might call for some 'quiet time' or at least a 'talking to.'
3
maybe this reaction calls in the end of ironic art where nothing matters and the nothingness is the matter which could only function in contrast to a structured, serious world. and a necessary return to serious art in a decomposing world.
2
Wondering what the copyrights/royalties legal issues would be if I tape up some bananas around my home or workplace?
Great thing is now everyone can have $120k works of art in their own homes. All for less than $5.
2
A banana is truly art. Such a perfect fruit, a beloved food of tiny babies. As adults you hate it or love it, never a meh moment. Perhaps the joke is indeed on us. The perfect comedy, we tend to think only artificially created paintings and sculptures by humans can embody the word art. I thank this artist for showcasing the irony of the artistic concept. He has pointed out how collectively blind the world really is.My admiration for Cattelan’s clarity knows no bounds. I do have one question though, can he please let me know his banana source? I cannot afford his art, but I can duct tape a sister fruit from the same tree on my empty wall. After all imitation is the best form of flattery.
2
What are the intersectional politics of defending the bound banana image? We should remember that art shapes life.
1
Cattelan is a deep melancholic and this new piece is as the artist’s work: neither funny nor sanctimonious. It is a great piece of art that will go beyond today’s interpretations.
1
Five years ago I was at the Hammer museum in Los Angeles with my ten year old son. After two hours of looking at contemporary art, my son, who was feeling tired, saw a stool and walked up to it, hesitated, and asked a museum guard, "can I sit on this, or is it art?"
9
This is bad publicity for the contemporary art world.
The artist is already famous and the gallery is well known.
So what was the point - to garner more publicity?
As a supporter of contemporary arts, I am disappointed by the whole affair.
The installation of the piece drew crowds and thousands of selfie pictures.
IF publicity was the galleries intent, then I guess they were successful.
I respect the artist right to make the work and exhibit the work, but it is unfortunate that so many other artists, who deserve attention, get lost in the media blitz over the banana.
2
Bananas
Adapted from Trees
BY JOYCE KILMER
I think that I shall never purloin-a;
A poem as lovely as a banana.
A banana for a mouth is pressed;
And is by earth’s sweet ground blessed.
A banana that looks at God all day;
And lifts itself erect to pray.
A banana that may in winter wear;
Bundled critics without a care.
Upon its virtue man has lain;
Banana infamy, banana fame.
If banana poems are for living things like me;
GMO companies, keep-a making banana trees.
2
@Daniel Kauffman
Hat tip to Adam Sandler
You can call me a philistine, no problem.
But if you look at the great art of the last 5000 years, it happened when technology, money and genius met. Michelangelo painted with egg white and pigment on wet plaster because that was the best technology, he was funded by the Catholic church as part of its propaganda machine, and he was the most talented person around.
Right now the confluence of those three things is cinema. It has moved art out of the galleries and into people's homes, has combined the visual arts, drama and music in a way that Opera doesn't quite do, attracts amazing talent and makes money in the many millions.
Art galleries get the pickings and it shows.
4
A paragraph is art, and a paragraph of someone else's handiwork being taped to the wall may be art, but only someone with way too much money would spend so much on it. I love jokes and do pay for them, but it's typically $50 for 1-2 hours of them.
2
The artist is always powerless until the collectors, gallerists, or really, THE MONEY changes the very nature of the work. The only criticality the can be measured upon "Comedian," is it's art historical relevance. Given that the 20th century is RIPE with mirrored examples of Dada-Punk-Fluxus rebellions, this is pure spectacle. It's a $120K, 2 second selfie bit of STALE absurdity—and yes the joke is on you, not the artist.
1
I was into "art satire" several years ago. In fact, I did a similar piece for a big show in Cleveland. It was called, "Green Banana". Well, the show got postponed for 3 weeks and you can guess the rest!
2
The truth about anything is an evolving discussion. This case is in the blurry border where new things emerge... or is it where old things fade away?
Fun to discuss, for those with the time and inclination, and yes, such talk can be useful for a small number of people, maybe add meaning to their lives. Lucky them.
Meanwhile, $120,000 could have helped a lot of suffering people. In some parts of the world it's more than a person earns in an entire lifetime.
2
"... $120,000 could have helped a lot of suffering people."
That's nice of you to tell other people how to spend their money, but you are mistaken as to who is being helped:
1. Many people work in agriculture, including on banana plantations. Those workers were helped when the artist bought the banana. The work also includes instructions for replacing the banana as needed. Therefore workers will be helped in the future too.
2. The duct tape was made in a factory that employs people. Those people were likewise helped when the artist bought the duct tape.
3. The artist and the gallery will not throw away the money that they earned on the sale of the works. They will either invest it or spend it on future works, thereby helping even more people.
That's your lesson on the economics of art. Do you have any questions?
2
Nice try on the trickle-down economics lesson, but it is well documented that banana crops are highly exploitative of plantation workers, many of whom are children.
1
The idea that people attempt to justify this as art, the amount of "ink" spilled on it by serious critics and the fact that someone spent $120,000 on it that could be used in a multitude of better ways all make me think the climate apocalypse can't get here soon enough.
"What makes Mr. Cattelan a compelling artist ... is precisely his willingness to implicate himself within the economic, social and discursive systems that structure how we see and what we value." That's an easy position to take when you're already so wealthy that you can 'retire' from the art world and you're backed by one of the most powerful galleries in the world. What nonsense it is to pretend that this was some kind of brave and critical risk Cattelan took -- or that Perrotin isn't just trying to juice Cattelan's secondary market for another round of auction-house hot potato. 'Comedian' wasn't anything other than an obsolete formal gesture so completely out of touch with the urgencies, issues and actions both outside and inside the contemporary art world that its celebration of idiocy and decadence borders on the disgraceful.
103
@Sean
The Dada-inspired piece of old hat conceptualism by Maurizio Cattelan titled "Comedian" is more than a prank or art world provocation. The idea signals the end of an attitude that elevates the banal to the status of "art" that problematizes the distinction between art and life. The duct tape not only suspends the banana on the wall, it also suggests a symbolic negation: no food for thought here. That the artist included instructions for collectors purchasing the work to replace the fruit every week or so, perpetuates the idea of the work thus reinforcing the negation.
Jason Farago points out that "Comedian" is an insider's critique of the art market. And it certainly can be read this way, although, the critique is undermined by the simple fact that Mr. Cattelan has benefited financially (and other ways) from this work. To my mind, this is what makes this work particularly sad. It is, in Farago's words, not only a "drooping and pitiful" commentary on the art market, but moreover, a revelation about the conflicted soul of the contemporary artist (any artist) with a desire but apparent inability to make sincere art.
Paul Forte
9
I was fine with everything Jason Farago was saying about Cattelan until he decided to throw in a dismissal of Banksy as "a fraud". Wait? Why is one art game Truth and the other a Con? By what measure is Banksy a real con while the "legitimate" artist Cattelan merely poses as a con? Who, the author points out, works 'within the system" rather than the anonymous Banksy who works from outside. Really? How outside? What system? This construct all falls apart if you exam it. Both artists have different strategies and I would be hard pressed to claim one prankster as an authentic artist and the other a shame. Please. And you were doing so well...
121
@Mike Cockrill
You're exactly right -- and Farago's commentary ignores the simple fact that Banksy is actually not a bad draftsman. It takes a good deal more craftsmanship to make a Banksy piece than to tape a banana to a wall.
Duchamp's urinal (entitled "Fountain", if my memory doesn't betray me) posited the notion that art is not inherent in the object but in the way we choose to look at it. But everyone who has exhibited found objects since Duchamp can be relegated to the status of purveyors of kitsch.
11
I don't know much about art, but I know produce when I see it.
32
"... I know produce when I see it."
That's a good start, but did you "see" the duct tape and the white wall to which the "produce" is affixed?
It's amazing how unobservant people can be when looking at works of art.
There are several books on looking at art, including "How to See: Looking, Talking, and Thinking about Art" by David Salle.
1
The “fine art” world has always existed for the pretentious and arrogant. The artist thinks he’s making some kind of bold commentary by selling a piece he and the rest of the world knows is baloney, but really he’s just perpetuating the cycle of art as elitist gatekeeping.
There’s nothing novel or even interesting about this exhibit. It’s just wealthy people throwing money around just to prove they can, and an ingratiating egotist accepting the money from his wealthy benefactor without establishing any conditions for its acceptance.
The exhibit COULD HAVE given the space to an exceptional artist to exhibit something that was actually groundbreaking. But the “fine art” world has always, ALWAYS cares more about who is doing the “art” than the art itself. They’ll throw millions and millions of dollars towards monuments of mediocrity as long as the artist behind it fits the correct archetype that wealthy people gravitate towards.
But if the artist themselves does something truly great and groundbreaking but doesn’t look or act like wealthy investors want them to look or act, then they’re shut out.
This entire thing is an indictment on the “fine art” community, and society in general.
96
Mr. Cattleman has made a career of poking fun at the perceived and real, pretentiousness of the art world.
When Cattelan dressed as a giant-headed Picasso à la a Disney character at Moma for “Projects 65” back in 1999. It was hilarious and pointed. But the audience/fans had to learn about via art magazines. (Feel free time google it.)
Twenty years later, we are all connected in an instant. So a banana went viral. Don’t block yourself off to art due to a taped banana. There are many amazing facets of creative life to discover. (and free days at most museums!)
1
@Austin Ouellette Virtue signaling ... look at how much money I can spend on an ephemeral meme -- and gets him press and even positive press. Human are funny sheep.
2
If an undergraduate art student offered up this one-liner (or no-liner) in a class, I hope their instructor would suggest they try thinking at a deeper level. And their parents should wonder why they were dumping money into an art education.
For almost a century artists and so-called artists have been playing off on Duchamp's sly and subversive visual jokes. I wish they'd cut it out already - hardly any of them make anything nearly as interesting. It's so tiresome and precious.
2
People voted for and support Donald Trump. That someone paid $120,000 for a banana is not surprising.
4
Takeaways:
* Clearly some people have too much money.
* The art, and this artist, has all the novelty of a cream pie to the face.
it's a banana taped to a wall.
1
sad but no surprise that "its the money stupid"
I have precious little to add to what those who have been chosen as NYT Picks have already said. However, it seems worthwhile to add another voice to the general view that a banana duct-taped to a wall is not a work of art. What I find surprising is that an art critic should have delivered himself of 1400 words (give or take one or two) to offer a 'grudging' defence of it. He might just as well have published a picture of the banana taped to a wall, and added the caption: 'This is not art.' Instead he tells us that he cannot make a sound judgement since he did not actually see it. What was there to see that he couldn't have seen in a photograph? Brushstrokes? Nuance? Colour? Composition? Meaning? Real artists may not be out to hoodwink us, but surely, to any reasonable person, a banana duct-taped to a wall presented to us as art, call it what you will, is a con. As for the person willing to pay $120,000 for something he could have bought at his local green-grocer's at 99 cents a pound, is it at all captious to say that he was conned?
3
The IRS should send a full time guy to Miami Art Basel. Just saying :-)
3
Possibly an accurate assessment of Cattelan, but a woefully naive dismissal of Banksy. The fact that Cattelan validates your point of view and Banksy questions it hardly makes Cattelan sophisticated/more worthy of our attention and Banksy “juvenile” and “tedious.”
2
@Anthony Flack
Art has intrinsic value. It's worth is not determined by the price that it commands.
Some of the Great Masters died penniless. Does that mean that their work had no value , and that a banana duct-taped to a wall has value because there are fools who are willing to pay $120,000 for bananas that are duct-taped to walls?
A good way to determine whether something is art is to show it to a child, as my grandmother did when she took me to the Museum of Modern Art when I was four. I was duly unimpressed .
I took one look at the "art" , pointed at it, and exclaimed :"Grandma ! Just like we do in nursery !
Four year olds couldn't be fooled into believing that a banana duct-taped to a wall was art ,or that said duct-taped banana was worth any more than any other banana.
Given the ease with which one can duct-tape bananas to walls, I suggest that parents, teachers, and others who are around children take bananas and duct-tape the bananas to walls, and observe the children's reaction.
I would bet you a Monet that a four year old wouldn't be willing to break open his or her piggy bank for a banana duct-taped to a wall.
Everyone is paying attention to the banana. Perhaps they should pay attention to what is absent, all those good/bad/great/infantile works that people with too much money are investing in, packing unseen away in vaults for some future splash. I for one would prefer a Cattelan banana with duct tape (call it Comedian) to a rich man's opiode Rembrandt (make it a missing Picasso) tucked away out of view, or donated to get his (yes HIS) name on the wall.
And I do love Rembrandt and Picasso.
I'm sorry, I just think that anyone who has that kind of money to just throw away on a stunt, should just have it taxed and given to those who really need it.
Great to learn that what separates this piece from a tiresome and dated Dadaist exercise is a piece of duct tape but, that aside, only a critic could entertain so primitive a view of aesthetics.
In the age of "influencers", the idea of the artist, the garret and lots of pasta may seem like a relic of the 19th century, but some of us still look to art, even middling art, for what's difficult, idiosyncratic and elegant, not for what sells to brain-dead institutions and philistine billionaires.
What's it all about? Humiliation. The rich and their minions fear art as it has the power to affect change. They hunger for amusement and find it in novelty. Kitsch.
2
I suppose it depends on what your definition of "art" is. A banana taped to a wall certainly doesn't fit mine.
When this type of junk is exhibited as art to viewers who clearly have no clue about its meaning, it is time to fold the tent and call it a day.
I wish Tolstoy’s “What is Art” was widely available and required reading in high schools everywhere. Then perhaps Mr Farago would use his considerable talents and education for a little more than chasing taped bananas in Miami. Not even Basel!
2
"If you buy a light work by Dan Flavin and the fluorescent bulb starts flickering, you can replace it with a new one. If you buy a Sol LeWitt wall drawing and you move house, you can erase the old one and draw a new one." Are you sure about this? My understanding is that these two examples of preservation and reproduction dilemmas are not settled due to complications stemming from the artists' copyrights and, in particular, moral rights.
Culture in the age of wealth inequality.
Banksy is not a real artist but this guy is?
I think he has it exactly backwards, at least as far as Banksy goes. If ever anyone not only created art, but created his own genre, it is Mr. Banksy.
One can, as we see, make a somewhat tortured defense of a banana taped to a wall. In that this critic is, perhaps, creating his own art.
I would dearly love to see this critic defend Vogon poetry. He seems to twist in the same winds...
2
This is absolutely Not Art. Full stop.
It's rank hooliganism. Even graffiti takes more effort.
All over the world, there are many millions of qualified artists who have devoted themselves to serious study; who have endured hardships, even, to perfect their vision and technique.
The idea that someone can slap a piece of duct tape over an item, and stick it on the wall, and call it "work," much less "art," is profoundly offensive.
It trivializes the legitimate efforts of genuine artists and demeans the contents of every important museum on the planet.
One would expect people who work in paid media to understand minimum performance standards of other professions, and stop undermining the civilization without which all media become pointless, New York Times!
To those commenters who cite Freud: Freud was talking about cigars, not bananas, and those too yellow to correctly cite the grate (that’s not a typo) psychiatrist should reassess their discursive system, which structures how we make bread, peel off duct tape, and split off (with an ice cream metaphor) into critical factions which make all efforts fruit-less. Lordy! I feel like I’m in a Woody Allen movie, saturated with potassium and sugar, at least countering with salty comments, but otherwise it’s driving me, obviously without sang-froid—bananas.
Joseph Beuys’ Fettecke was accidentally cleaned up back in 1982. The similarities are striking, the banana and its brouhaha are a laughable me-too. Been there, seen that. Before.
1
I believe Mr. Cattelan could have used a halved pomegranate, more pointillist! Its consumption would have been more difficult too.
1
As I understand Mr. Farago, what makes this bit of foolishness art is that it is parody from within the artistic community, and that a banana duct taped to a wall by someone outside the community — someone like the “fraud” Banksy — would not be art. That seems to be a definition of art with no limits other than membership in the club.
1
I found this to be a well-written and erudite analysis as to why this is indeed art. I hope you read the article all the way through to gain some insight into Cattelan’s work. You might not like his work, but, just as the challenges of Dada, it has a place in the art world and a tight, long-term, and consistent conceptual basis.
In Arizona $120,000 is two years salary for a teacher with a Masters degree and 20 years experience. This "banana for billionaires" shows priorities in the United States.
2
Art is worth whatever someone will pay for it.
In this case, this absurdity is apparently worth $120K.
The real question is will anyone ever buy it from the first owner for any more, particularly when it can be so easily copied.
It’s already eaten. So no secondary market for that one. I can make a market though. I will take 50 K and throw in a punt if vanilla bean ice cream.
1
Of course the piece is art. (Was art, actually. Since it's gone now.) But it's not very good art. It's primarily derivitive from Duchamp as are hundreds of works made by art students in the studios of the world's high schools and colleges.
Now maybe a big pile of bananas..... No. That's also been done.
Mr. Farago rightly defines the contemporary art world as "the economic,social and discursive systems that structure how we see and what we value". The "we" ,however, is not the educated people,as he might imply,who are alienated and estranged by most of contemporary art,because of artists like Mr.Cattalan and critics like Mr. Farago. The "we" is a relatively small social network that feeds on itself and on public budgets.
3
Showing a banana (very similar to Trump's caricatural hair), in Florida (where Trump has a mansion), during a period in history where the US looks very much like a Banana Republic, precariously attached to a wall thanks to some tape that someone will maybe be able to rip off (impeachment) seems quite a great idea to me. The price in itself means nothing - as usual in contemporary art - and is immoral anyway, considering how many people could eat with that money. But the artistic idea behind it is really great, in my opinion.
6
The taped banana, a spoof on the old joke about slipping on a banana peel, immediately brought to mind this quote by Marcel Duchamp - “What I have in mind is that art may be bad, good or indifferent, but, whatever adjective is used, we must call it art, and bad art is still art in the same way that a bad emotion is still an emotion.”
1
For the "collector's" $120K comes the right to loan the work to any institution for a hefty fee, over and over. The institution exhibits it and gate receipts go up. There are lots of jibber-jabber articles, selfies and low-bar mental gymnastics like Farago's notes here. P.T. Barnum smiles and counts the cash.
5
Late capitalism and the 1%. Need we say more?
4
Allow me to play Devil’s Advocate for one moment. When people complain about how easy it is to make a piece of art, so why is it so special and expensive, my answer is always this—“If it is so easy to make something which gets people’s respect and money then why didn’t you think of it first?” Respect the player, and hate the game!
2
What would prove Mr. Cattelan isn’t the cynic you think Banksy is is if he duct-taped every dollar of the $120,000 to a wall next to the banana or, better, threw it all up in the air outdoors and preferably on a windy day - a brief moment if suspension.
4
I tell my students as a professor of art history it is time that artists stop trying to shock, time to stop playing cool, time to stop creating overly-secularized, cute, but meaningless art. Art for the most part has become a trivial cul-de-sac, Jeff Koons and the rest.
It is time to move beyond self-referencing, unimaginative satires, indecipherable scrawls on walls and the worship of nothing.
Maybe this is the Kali Yuga, as the Hindu say, the worst of ages, particularly in art.
The only path out of this is up--let's once again support artists who go deeper, explore the divine, and give us inspiring spiritual images, no matter the religion. Considering the shape of this world now, nothing is needed more.
9
Yes, we have no banana today.
5
If I were to take one of the bananas from a bowl in my kitchen and get duct tape from a shelf in the garage and tape the banana on
a white wall of my living room, would it be an illegal copy of an original?
6
I started to read this review because the headline made it sound appealing, but I gave up once I realized it was fruitless to continue.
6
Good Article NYT. I agree 100%.
I'm a visual artist...have been my whole life and will keep going till I'm dead. Currently having a hard go at it. Been inside the art world from the top to the bottom.
Comedian is a great work.
"...and the emperor’s-new-clothes impression..." There is a lot of it going on in Miami on the art week, including Art Basel. My husband and I go each year, enjoy what we like and amuse ourselves with the "bananas" of "the art".
But I am so happy that Art Basel is here. It changed Miami completely. Art Basel has been the single stronger catalyst for its evolution and culture. Today it has so many expos all over the city that is difficult to choose. Event planners' hardest task is to draw people to their events.
It even made us a gastronomic capital of the world. The human element is of the essence. We came from all over.
By the way, last night when we left the expo and security asked us to open my bag, I am sure they were looking for bananas.
The title of this article goes to explain what all of this seems to be screaming very loudly. A small group of wealthy individuals to remind you, with their feckless dollars, that it's the dollars that say what art is, you tiny and insignificant academics, not you.
5
The emperor has no clothes.
4
The critic/author of this piece has joined the ranks of those who have completely parted ways with any common sense. What a bunch of meaningless words about a wasteful spectacle.
7
"almost nobody has discussed that it is not just “a banana.” It is a banana and a piece of duct tape, and this is a significant difference.... "
Thank god for art critics' insight and acumen. Where would civilization be without their training and eye for detail?
6
An insult to true artists.
5
I don't know how much money you have to have not to be offended by a hundred thousand dollar banana, but apparently, a lot. The banana on the wall is only vaguely viable as art if you see it as performance art. An admission is charged, perhaps, you view the darn banana, you hang around looking bemused, and finally, you walk out laughing or crying. In short order, you forget about the time you might have wasted dragging yourself to the darn venue. And I thought I paid a lot for a banana at the Plaza! (And I got to eat it.)
...meanwhile, Flint still doesn't have clean water
8
Not impressed by the banana.
Even less impressed by this op-ed defending why it's "worthwhile."
This level of modern "art" just seems like mindless flocking behaviour.
4
Boredom makes the art world go round.
1
Reading the outraged comments about this piece makes me think two things:
1. It is supposed to be a provocation
2. If your not interested in contemporary art and the issues surrounding it then just change the channel. Pop culture offers a million different ways to entertain yourselves with things that are predictable and unoffensive.
1
Whether or not you think it is Art it's "value" is whatever some fool is willing to pay for it. I continue to be amazed at what people will pay for art=work. Yes there are magnificent pieces of Art out there but paying 10's of Million$ for a piece of canvas with paint on it!
2
BANANA BANANA ON THE WALL, Who is the most artistic one of all? Does his name rhyme with Cattleman? BINGO! Actually I think that the banana artifact that was removed was not quite complete. True, it was held in place by its indispensable silver duct tape. But the essential element of a thorough spraying with Windex was missing to make the Cattelan oeuvre complete. Though I have my doubts that he intended to invoke the aesthetic of the video, My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Some alterations to masterpieces are absolutely requisite to their ultimate success. Meanwhile, Dear Reader, walk with all due caution, lest you slip on some unaccounted for banana peel.
I don't know what is the most depressing:
a) That despite all of the troubles in the world, people still flock to this sort of thing, as Eric Blair's comment articulates;
b) That the banana may actually have something to say about value creation in our society; or
c) That even if it did, nobody would listen, which I suppose brings us right back to a).
3
This article illustrates why museums,collectors and critics have been pushing contemporary art to it's current sad status. So many big words about a banana.
two years ago students left a pineapple at an art show as a prank. It became art. If told that a known artist did it the writer would most probably would have written a long article explaining why this is a great masterpiece.
3
Who can even bring themselves to read this? We all know the truth. The only people whose lives depend on the truth not being the truth in this case are art critics.
7
A thought experiment: if anyone but a famous artist taped a banana to a wall would it be worth more than the handful of cents the materials cost? Of course not.
So the value is purely social capital. The content truly doesn't matter, the meaning doesn't matter, the quality doesn't matter. What matters is that *Maurizio Cattelan* taped a banana to a wall. I can agree that this amounts to... something. But whatever it is, it's not art. And that you can, with some mental contortions, put this thing in a dialogue with his previous work does not transmute it into art.
16
Another article today looks at Attorney General Barr. Connect the dots.
3
PT Barnum is having a good laugh!
4
It’s a banana, and a piece of duct tape, and a lot of mildly educated viewers and critics.
2
The brilliance of the artist here is in stimulating a vibrant discussion, not the work itself. An intangible is often worth much more than the visible. Bravo, Signor Cattelan!
2
@Soisethmd1 Seriously, how could he accept that kind of money for a piece of fruit, about to rot, no doubt?
2
The vibrant discussion will be over and forgotten before the banana
1
Most of us who still read a newspaper want help in our grievous bewilderment. What’s the point? The critic is just trying to do his job. Nice work, if you can get it.
"Let's just throw them a banana, and I'll see the explanations they try to invent and how much I can get for it".
If the "author" is foolish, what can be said of those who applaud?
4
If that banana on the wall is art then my basement is the Louvre
12
As an independent not-meant-to-be-sold, experience-only art piece - the duct taped banana is fine.
What makes it sad is what else that money could have gone to. The banana and duct tape cross the line because just about anybody could do the same thing - "We are the Revolution", not nearly as much.
Plus the latter is clever and thought-provoking, and there is also craft in it, and insight.
The duct-taped banana is reminiscent of The Gates, in Central Park, in 2005. Long on concept, short on delivery.
2
Why can’t a person duct tape their own banana to a wall and have their own work of art? There, I just saved art poseurs a lot of misspent money.
1
Why are we still talking about this..
6
as far as I know, a banana rotts completely in a few days. so what will remain in the hands of buyers? a work of art that they may call "change" or "the end"? a work of art of which only the ribbon will remain in a while? And will anyone see in this work in perishable art a criticism of the consumer society? Is lasting just what is not natural?
1
The natural element will die and disintegrate, while the manmade tape remains forever, outlasting its usefulness. Symbolic of what's happening in our world. Not sure it's at all what the artist might have meant, but a good work of art generates thought and discussion and this work did just that. Why $125,000? Yeah that's crazy but isn't the price of so many things crazy - impractical shoes or wines for thousands of dollars, hundreds of thousands on sports cars in the city that can't be driven more than the30 mile limit etc.? That's part of the point too, I think.
This is an insult to creativity.
4
That's the defense? I couldn't even paraphrase it now, because it was so empty of content.
2
It's not the banana that is causing the furor. Those who know art understand this isn't new. Duchamp. The Dadaists. The Situationists. Those who don't care for art understand this isn't new too - people have been mocking, say, Rothkos for decades.
What's driving the conversation is that multiple people have spent six figures on this piece. In an era ruled by plutocrats and oligarchs.
The sounds you hear are the guillotines sharpening.
5
This was an inside job to generate publicity. I would bet this was not an arms length transaction.
2
Sometimes a banana is just a banana.
3
It is a mockery of art. It is utter nonsense, and extremely disrespectful. Rather than grudgingly defending this, you could resign.
2
I don’t think they’re bananas. I think they’re all nuts.
P.S. And just for the record, I’m truly an art lover...
1
I would be interested to know what the artist does with the money. Does he buy a new car or donate it to a charity? Sure, there might be a sucker born every minute, but we can at least put their money to good use.
1
Here’s the thing. New York thinks bananas duct taped to walls is art. New York gave us the Great Recession. New York gave us Trump. New York gave us Hillary, which got us Trump. New York wants us to substitute Bloomberg, the new boss, for Trump the old boss - oy. As Bob Dylan said - Why don’t you fade back into your own parade, ‘cause even though I do like a nice Reuben, you folks aren’t worth it.
2
I think the publicity concerning this stunt is the real piece of art.
4
It’s called decadence and we know what happened to the Roman Empire when it’s elite became decadent.
4
I cannot believe the seriousness with which ‘art critics’ have discussed this. It is obscene that someone would pay US$120k for this when there are people in American going hungry. It’s not some clever artful commentary on society it’s self indulgent, crass and a blatant in-your-face example of how much the gulf between the have and the have-nots is growing. How very Marie-Antoinette of everyone involved
7
Why take it down early? How hard can it be to find another banana and length of duct tape and re-affix. In fact, the second attempt will probably have tape free of wrinkles and with cleaner corners, garnering a higher price tag.
The only "suspension" I see pertinent in this is the suspension of disbelief that "art" is Bunk!
Another tidbit re what a deplorable culture we are. People are starving and people are throwing away their money.
6
That’s no banana! I’m just happy to see you! Ba da boom.
New York is the kitsch capital of the world.
1
It's been downhill since the Renaissance.
1
Wait, it wasn't even a plastic banana?
Why does this guy get a pass for ripping off Andy Warhol's Velvet Underground album cover?
1
If the banana installation was done as a scathing indictment of the sorry state of art in this dreadful time then I am all for it.
If it pretends to be some kind of important artistic statement, then it should be made into a smoothie. The real genius was pulling the fool thing off the wall and eating it.
2
Funny how in an article asking us to consider the banana art more seriously by being mindful of the full context of the artists work...the author does the exact opposite when referring to, and criticizing, Banksy. As far as I’m aware, the vast majority of Banksy’s work has nothing to do with the “art world.”
3
Articles like this are welcome ammunition, wrapped up and presented on a platter to alienated working-class independents and conservatives who view liberalism (once upon a time known as the party of the working class) as intellectually insulated, emotionally dishonest, and morally bankrupt. Thank you, NYT, for showcasing the worst of what contemporary art has to offer. Honestly, I’d have gotten more fulfillment just from reading the NYC jazz listings.
2
The ‘random person’ who ate the banana wasn’t random. It’s another artist, Georgian-born American, David Datuna.
3
It's a banana duck taped to a white wall. There is nothing more insightful about it because all the elements of visual persuasion and imaginative abstraction are fully realized when you act on and task simple objects in a simple way.
We all want and need art to be something more than just throwing something on a wall and hoping it sticks.
When all is said and done, the taping job on the banana was highly professional.
That alone was worth a couple of bucks.
2
Believe it or not, I have a banana duct-taped to a white wall in my house. I would like to get it evaluated. Is it an original by Mr. Cattelan or is it just a cheap copy? One of my neighbors, who eats a banana every day, says that if it is a copy it is a very good one. The brown spots on the banana look exactly like those that Mr. Cattelan is famous for. The duct tape is the same gray with highlights and shadows that Mr. Cattelan, "a compelling artist", uses to make us think of Rembrandt's sfumato technique. Due to the questions about attribution, I am willing to sell my Comedian #2 for only $60,000 plus applicable taxes.
4
My sympathies are with the guy who ate it.
2
I love it. There’s something clean about how well the duct tape holds the banana to the wall. I think a selfie with it would go well on my Tinder profile.
Can we tax the rich now? When someone can spend $120,000 on this, they have too much money. Admit it.
5
They’re generating jobs. Like that of this critic’s. Can’t be taxed.
2
This reminds me of the time a janitor swept up an exhibition by Damien Hirst at the Tate Modern in London. He saw what looked like junk on the floor and proceeded to treat it as such, not realizing it was 'an important work of art'
The janitor was the only honest one among all the phonies.
9
(For background, I am a former art student with a BFA.) Many years ago, I accompanied my husband to a conference at Stanford University, while he attended his meetings I perused the art galleries. There was a student exhibit of dirty women’s panties tack to the wall and old dirty toaster ovens on display. All I could think was, “Someone’s parents paid $150,00 a year tuition for this?”
5
The question is not "Is it Art", it is. The question as yet unanswered is, "Is it good?"
2
you don't need any qualifications to call yourself an artists or art critic, thus we see this kind of writing, but in the NYT? The art world is one of the last industries where you can launder your black market dollars and stack your art collection in warehouses without paying tax on the profits and hide the assets from inspection. If and when this changes, there will be fewer bananas on the walls...
3
I have no problem with an artist expressing whatever he or she feels like art. My question is, what is the motive or psychological state of a person paying any amount of money for the banana. Thanks
1
For me the problem is not the legitimacy of this piece. The problem is the narrowing discussion of what is legitimate and supported ...a neo-academic attitude that develops from these discussions... one that tens to disregard legitimate art inclinations not born of this spirit.
1
Maybe it's true that "Comediam" is a itself a satire of the art world, critiquing it from within. But even if that's true, so what? The average person already hates contemporary art. Does an art piece really say anything meaningful, when all it does is perpetuate what it supposidely critiques? I don't think so.
2
I think it is an error to over-generalize what a single artwork means about Art, the state of art, the art market. No work has to answer these questions all by itself, just as a single economics paper shouldn't have to answer for the state of an economy, or a loaf of bread for the state of baking. A work of art can do many things and one is to provide the grounds for asking questions, for trying to find new horizons of meaning.
If we only begin to think about a work's price as the focus of it's meaning, than many of the artists used as comparisons in these comments are also invalidated retroactively. Why should a Picasso be worth 20 million? It is more interesting to think about and speculate on what meaning is generated by this quick taping gesture than to close down on thought as a know-it-all generalist
4
I think it is an error to over-generalize what a single artwork means about Art, the state of art, the art market. No work has to answer these questions all by itself, just as a single economics paper shouldn't have to answer for the state of an economy, or a loaf of bread for the state of baking. A work of art can do many things and one is to provide the grounds for asking questions, for trying to find new horizons of meaning.
If we only begin to think about a work's price as the focus of it's meaning, than many of the artists used as comparisons in these comments are also invalidated retroactively. Why should a Picasso be worth 20 million? It is more interesting to think about and speculate on what meaning is generated by this quick taping gesture than to close down on thought as a know-it-all generalist.
Remember when Gabriel Orozco put a yogurt lid on the wall and called that art? Ha, put the yogurt next to the banana, and we have a complete breakfast.
3
Perhaps the art work was the duct alone and the banana was only used for scale?
2
I think we are losing sight of a very important point here.
It's not duct tape. It's duck tape. So named because it's waterproof. It should never be used to repair ducts because it's not heat-resistant.
8
"It's not duct tape. It's duck tape. So named because it's waterproof."
I can't tell if you are joking or not, but DUCT tape is the generic name. "Duck" is a brand name that is a pun on "duct".
You can check for yourself by doing a web search for "3M duct tape".
"It should never be used to repair ducts because it's not heat-resistant."
Some types of duct tape can be used at temperatures up to 200(deg)F.
Anyway, for the art work on display, neither water nor high temperatures should be an issue. An outdoor installation would be a different matter.
Perhaps Maurizio Cattelan will create another work for display outside using a suitable agricultural product and weather-resistant duct tape.
"It is a banana _and_ a piece of duct tape, and this is a significant difference."
There is a subtle relationship between the banana and the duct tape that requires some knowledge:
Both are formed in layers -- the banana has a peel and a fruit, while the duct tape has a backing and an adhesive.
And there are contraries, the banana naturally decays, while duct tape is designed to resist decay. Hence there is a contrast between the natural and the man-made.
Further, the banana is roughly cylindrical, while the tape is nearly planar except where it wraps around the banana.
4
Actually a bit surprising that no one jumps on the occasion to bring up the piece "senza titolo" by Giovanni Anselmo (1968), Art Povera artist, which consists on a simple piece of fresh lettuce squizzed between two blocks of marble, and who likewise and because of its natural condition was meant to be replaced every so often... Then, Yoko Ono's apple, which also long predates Cattelan's prank in more than one way. The only major difference between those propositions, which doesn't confer Cattelan's piece any particular credit, resides in the jacked-up price (and de facto propels it as an anti-arte-povera statement of a kind given its pricetag). At last, this remains a good publicity stunt. As to the MonaLisa effect, with selfie crowds recording the moment, it's a bit depressing...Okay, moving on...
3
As a former museum curator, this so called 'art' reminds me of a comment by an art critic, that 'modern art is not meant to be understood by the public, understanding modern art and explaining it to the viewing public, is the task of the art critic. I ain't buying it.
5
The banana and its duct is another visual expression of our actual world:a total emptiness of meaning and the destruction, in this case, of any visual challenge. But, it succeeded: it became also another futile exercise in our tweet-written driven daily intellectual invasion for our attention.
6
Maybe it is just me,
but I define a work of serious art
as something I could never produce
but I would not mind be able to gaze upon
once a year for ten minutes.
Most Modern Art is not worth look at for
more than a ten seconds once a century.
People are starving.
People are homeless.
People are dying of thirst.
Where is the art that will
ask future generations to
consider their plight
and ours to change it ?
9
"Where is the art that will ask future generations to consider their plight and ours to change it ?"
What you want is politicized art. Although he is a critic of such art, Sohrab Ahmari gives specific examples in his book:
"The new Philistines : how identity politics disfigure the arts" (2016).
However, artists have long addressed political and social issues in art. See, for example:
* "Olympia" (1865) by Manet (women in society)
* "Guernica" (1937) by Picasso. (Spanish Civil War)
* "Immersion (P___ Christ)" (1987) by Andres Serrano (religion and public health)
A book on art history would have many more examples.
@JTN
It is not politicising Art at all ?
Not in the least.
It is humanising art.
Sometime in the future an genius of
an Art Critic will look back at
what we call Modern Art
and point out that most of it
was mediocre.
2
John: "It is humanising art."
A painting of a woman with her servant and her cat is very "humanising" (Manet). Likewise for art about war (Picasso) and religion (Serrano).
You can learn more about the three works I listed by looking them up online. There are Wikipedia articles on all three.
"Sometime in the future an genius of an Art Critic will look back at what we call Modern Art and point out that most of it was mediocre."
Manet's "Olympia" (1865) is not considered modern art. That's why I included it in my list, since your reaction was so predictable.
Bravo Jason, very impressive. Great job.
1
Michelangelo, van Gogh, Monet, Picasso, da Vinci, Rembrandt, Caravaggio, Vermeer, Dali, Renoir and many of the greats would be saddened to see what “art” has supposedly come to.
4
Dali had quite the sense of humor. He would probably have enjoyed this piece.
Why is art that embraces comedy not worthy of discussion?
Laughter, irony, satire, and impishness are all integral parts of the human experience. Art should play in those realms too.
4
Is it actually funny though?
This is not a useful example of human artistic potential, because the name is all wrong. Next time, call it "Billionaires Wasting Money". There, I fixed it.
6
I tried to go along with Farago's argument. And I'll admit I find myself intrigued by the theme of suspension in Catellan's art. But I take issue with the idea that art that plays by the rules of high art is somehow more sincere and meaningul than art that doesn't. The cultural history of the banana is fascinating. If Farago could explain, with all sincerity, how this work of art added to that history, I'd be on board. But he didn't - and I doubt anyone could without stretching the limits of art criticism in the service of the one percenters. In final analysis, it's hard to see how this is more than the super rich one upping the Whole Foods crowd, a la Veblen's conspicuous consumption.
5
This piece is a perfect example of what the art world has become: just another market, like the stock exchange, real estate, etc. Yet another place for the super rich to invest their money. That's it. The rest (the intention of the artist, the meaning of the work, etc.) is pointless. Just read "Boom" by Michael Schnayerson if you don't believe me.
I can understand why this critic wants to defend (albeit grudgingly) this work, but to me, it's pointless to do so. The only thing that matters about this piece is the price tag. This is why it is discussed and why it is the only work from Art Basel that the general public will care about. You can always argue that, from that point of view, it is indeed a work of genius, as it perfectly encapsulates the art world of today. But on the other hand, once you get that point, it immediately loses whatever makes it interesting. Will I remember this work in six months? Absolutely not.
It was much better when Duchamp did the same kind of work, a century ago. At least, back then, it had shock value. I was not shocked when I saw "Comedian", it was just one more conceptual piece, and not a terribly good one. The more I look at it, the more I see it as a cliché...
22
With overpopulation and global warming one day paying $120,000 for a banana or any piece of fresh produce may be a bargain. You'll pay even more to drink clean water.
2
No artist can produce something as complex as a banana, or any other biological life form for that matter. Every plant or animal has evolved over millions of years to a state of perfection (ok I know that the banana is probably a hybrid interbred by humans). If this is what Mr. Cattelan was demonstrating then I applaud him for it.
I feel sorry to have to point out what regrettably needs to be clarified to Mr. Farago, namely that the banana, held in place by duct tape, was simply a marker for the work of art, which was the area of drywall behind the banana. This play on the dichotomy of paradigm versus embodiment underlines the intellectual undertow challenging contemporary artists, viewers and, apparently, critics alike in a post-deconstructionist - or as some now say, a preconstructionist era of art.
Complimenti, Sig. Cattelan.
4
I work in the field of contemporary art so I'm quite grateful to works such as Cattelan's and for criticism such as this and the article's because they buy me dinner every day. I only wish that, at least amongst ourselves, we had the intellectual honesty to admit that most of it is just a hollow exercise in coming up with new witticisms, finding synonyms, and making up muddier lingo in the hope that we can buy some time yet until the public gets wise to us.
9
It’s definitely Dadaism at its best, but I’ll pass on the purchase - and hope the rest of the world does too.
2
Some post-modernist will say that is defensibly more beautiful than the Mona Lisa, and some political independent will overhear and decide to vote GOP.
4
I think the true artwork is my condemnation of this type of art, not the art itself.
5
I used to draw as a child, so as a college freshman I took Art 101 to see if I might want to major in it. Our first assignment was to do a kind of 3-D tactile collage inside a box that would express something about ourselves. I did something elaborate with multiple textures and the professor hated it. Another student brought in a box filled with rotting orange peels and the professor loved it. I changed my major to psychology. Years later I took up drawing again. My work will never sell for thousands, but it seems like art, even without rotting fruit.
6
"... and the professor hated it."
"... and the professor loved it."
In what context did the professor express those opinions?
When I took some college art classes, there were periodic mini-shows in which all the students displayed their recent work. The professor would then walk around and "critique" the work.
1
@JTN
He reviewed everyone's "homework" one by one in front of the class. I don't remember his words after so many years other than that he dismissed mine with no suggestions or encouragement whereas he thought the orange peels made a tremendously creative personal statement. I can accept criticism and take plenty of it in my current adult classes. I just have never been able to get why rotting fruit is considered high art. Too bad for me, because apparently there is big money in it.
1
"It is a banana and a piece of duct tape, and this is a significant difference."
And a wall. The artist could have displayed the banana in numerous ways -- on a pedestal, suspended from a rope, inserted in a vase, etc.
As for the duct tape, it should be reviewed more completely. There are many types of duct tape and the competition between brands is intense. Further, there are duct tapes designed specifically for artists. Indeed, the variety of tapes is astounding. So what is the significance of the tape that is actually used in the work?
And there is another aesthetic consideration -- the tape appears to have been cut rather than torn. That is significant because some duct tapes are advertised as being easy to tear by hand. (Strictly speaking, those are gaffer tapes used in theatrical, film, and video production.)
"It is up to the owners to secure their own materials from hardware and grocery stores, and to replace the banana, if they wish, whenever it rots."
Duct and gaffer tape can be ordered online, where there is a wider selection. Would it violate the artist's concept to use phosphorescent gaffer tape? That would let you find the work in the dark and move the work to different locations without damaging the wall. (Gaffer tape is designed to be easy to remove.)
Licensing terms: All creative concepts presented above are hereby placed in the public domain without any licensing restrictions.
6
Sometimes art makes direct statements about the world around us. It's always important to remember that that statement represents the viewpoint of the artist who creates it. I'd say most art represents an attempt by an artist to communicate an idea or opinion about what has artistic value in a particular culture to an individual viewer or listener. However sometimes an artist can make that statement indirectly. The artist in this case knows that his notoriety alone will attract attention to whatever he presents as art. In my mind, he knowingly attempted to create an outrage that would reflect his feelings about the contemporary art world and in my opinion, he has succeeded admirably. The fact that someone would be willing to pay $120,000 for this work goes right to the heart of the point he wanted to make. Readers comments should not be critical of the artist but rather a reflection of the absurd and toxic cloud surrounding the art world in the 21st century. Never forget money and art have no real connection, it's always been and will always be entirely arbitrary.
7
100 years ago when Marcel Duchamp’s “Fountain” seemed to propose that art was something to urinate on and the idea of confronting the monetization of fine art objects and the way these objects were used in a capitalistic culture by the wealthy oligarchy was something fresh. It was something revolutionary. That was 100 years ago.
Today this century old stale trope is as fresh as, well, … a month old banana.
Cattelan’s banana episode is a case of the artist going low and the “art world” going lower.
The act of hyper-monetization of a duct taped banana is more of a statement by and a demonstration of the power of the financial backers of the banana work than it is a confirmation of anything of value provided by the artist.
One can imagine Duchamp’s 1917 urinal “Fountain” as a metaphorical extension of Marcel’s center digit to a society gone mad during the grotesque insanity that was the First World War. With the prompt of Cattelan’s sensationalistic banana the world of finance is returning the gesture.
5
@Swift the insane part is that people who think a banana taped to a wall is irreverent or original are completely unaware of the art world itself. But then, you never go broke underestimating people...
2
Though it shouldn't be deemed offensive as a likeness of Jesus on crucifix in a glass of urine, it is equally silly as an expression of art. Though I'm sure the buyers of this silliness have money to burn, don't they understand they can do their own banana on wall art and save thousands?
4
"... a likeness of Jesus on crucifix in a glass of [a bodily fluid] ..."
If you are referring to the 1987 photograph by Andres Serrano, there is no "glass" visible in the photograph.
It's amazing how unobservant people can be when looking at works of art.*
BTW, Serrano is Catholic.
* There are several books on looking at art, including "How to See: Looking, Talking, and Thinking about Art" by David Salle.
What's about the demeaning comments about Banksy. His art appeals to the masses and can immediately be appreciated. His self-destructive painting is in my opinion quite appealing after the fact, and unlike a banana it will stay as such for future generations to enjoy and marvel. Whereas I do not dispute the value and genius of Mr. Cattelan's creations, the real appeal is reserved for a small audience (beyond the crowd which find the price-tag the most exciting attribute) familiar with his duct tape creations going back 20 years. If art is going to have a real impact, it better appeal to more than a small elite - Banksy certainly accomplishes that.
10
Big agree. Bashing Banksy's work as fluffy in order to defend a sophmoric prank is betting the house on a pair of threes.
3
The art of a dying culture
5
Someone paid $120,000 for a taped banana?
Perhaps a “wealth tax” is in order.
15
It's titled "Comedian".
In this age of industrialized wonder, about 3.1 million children die of undernutrition every year. About 1.3 billion tons of produce is unconsumed and discarded every year.
And someone just bought a banana for $120,000.
Not all satire needs words to be impactful.
10
Cattelan is a genius. Who else could get so much mileage from a piece of duct tape and a banana? The idea of suspension is intriguing, and I love that Cattelan has reduced it to its elements: tape, object (done).
2
To appreciate "Comedian," it helps to remember that all art is performance.
This work should not be reduced to found objects and a taping technique, and I thank the critic here for filling me in on the artist's previous uses of suspension.
Yes, the asking price is ridiculous, but that's also part of the performance.
2
Art is a joke. We get it, we get it.
4
I get the idea behind this work. Conceptual art has a long history. I just don’t find it interesting. I also find the conscious cleverness annoying.
7
Let us know if someone slips on the peel.
2
Is it art? The crucial question is: is it Rembrandt, Turner, or Monet? Self-evident answer: No. Nowhere close. Just something for artists with nothing to say, art buyers with no taste (and not enough money to buy a Rembrandt), and critics with nothing more to say about Rembrandt, etc. And nothing much to say in general.
5
Walking through an art gallery in Santa Fe, New Mexico, many years ago I ran into a pile of rocks in a sort of enclosure. There was a sign with the name of the exhibit and the name of the artist. I didn't memorize the names, of course. What was sort of interesting was a short narrative attached under the exhibit's label that explained the nature of the art. Apparently, the artist would wander around in the New Mexico desert thinking deep thoughts. Once in a while, he would pick up a rock that he somehow linked with one of his deep thoughts and put it in a bag. He would then turn this bag of stones into a piece of art, give it a name and sell it in the art gallery. And people would buy it! Probably the same people who bought the banana
10
You’ve given me an idea!
2
@Chamuquin ...and yet, somehow, all these years later, you remember it..it had some impact on you, whether it was positive or negative
1
@guy595 It was a lesson, not about a pile of rocks, but of what people will believe. I did not find the banana story that incredible.
1
First world frivolity (ahem) ‘art’...
3
A banana is a banana is a banana
A ruse to promote a art show...
2
My definition of art: When you take "one or more things" and put them together with "one or more things" and make something that hasn't existed before. It must be displayed in public, and to actually be considered "art" it must be reacted upon (either positively or negatively) by someone. Without being seen or reacted upon it has not fulfilled it's life as "art". The fact that this duck taped banana has created such a stir, has made it art for sure. Whether or not it is "good" art or not, is another story entirely, but it is definitely art according to my definition.
2
Seems to me that “Comedian” is just a step or two further down a natural progression that has given us Jeff Koons and his ‘one born every minute’ selling prices.
The joke’s on the collector. The auction house, on the other hand...
5
I will ask myself "what is art"? It is communication. It can be a physical revelation, as a single Vermeer painting was to me, when I saw it near the end of a long dispiriting day at the Louvre. It can be a thing of undeniable beauty. It can be a masterwork of craft, such as being in the presence of a great violin virtuoso, playing an impossibly difficult passage, as if it were the easiest thing in the world. As if to say "I can do this, none of you can".
And, it can be entertainment. It can be fun. Who will deny that Richard Pryor was a great artist and entertainer. The photo, of a crowd, joyfully taking pictures of a banana taped to the wall of a great "art" exhibit is sufficient. It's fun. It's entertaining. As Mick Mulvany, recently said, "Get over it".
2
Things like this show just how irrelevant most of the"art world' is to the general public.
And has been for many decades.
It only seems to matter to art museums, galleries, art journalists, and wealthy collectors.
Or am I missing something here?
5
I just paint pictures.
2
I’m hungry. Bring me art. Slow news cycle. Who even knows.
1
Words, words, words.
To quote Shakespeare.
1
As Freud once said: "sometimes a bunch of idiots—are just a bunch of idiots."
Or something like that.
4
"I don't like it" and "it's not art" are two very different statements. Honestly... It deals with aesthetics, it's conceptually open to interpretation... these are the hallmarks of art. The notion that this piece is somehow offensive to more classical styles of art is outrageous. That line of thinking is analogous to the idea that gay marriage ruins straight marriage. Also, consider that there's a reason contemporary artists don't just try to paint like Rembrandt or Monet or Picasso.
I'm dismayed by the outrage. Get over it! Think critically! Be more secure in your own aesthetic tastes! Be open to experiences that challenge your comfort zones!
5
To me, each person defines what "art" is for themselves. If someone believes a banana duck taped to a wall is art, then it's a work of art for that person. If another believes only representational paintings qualify as art, then only a representational painting is a work art for that person. Many people only consider objects as art if they get the stamp of approval from an art critic. In my opinion, all of this is valid for that person and should be respected. What do you consider a piece of art?
1
What's wonderful is that reviews such as this, elevating a "sculpture" that requires no skill to produce and depends wholly for its significance and legitimacy on a contextual memory of high-priced art, are exactly what keeps Banksy's work perennially relevant. Any critic claiming that Comedian is art while the self-destructing Girl With Balloon is a tedious prank absolutely assures the value of Banksy's future works that indict such patently ridiculous distinctions. When a Banksy piece is destroyed after fetching $1.2MM, it's not art or artists that are mocked, it's critics and collectors--and it underscores their uselessnes to everyone but the one-percenters who sustain the "art world."
8
Maybe the art here is the banana, the tape, the wall, the money, and that we are all talking about its mere existence. Even those who detest it make it art.
5
Yes. It’s true. There IS a sucker born every minute.
5
A durian would have made a real statement.
6
“... Mr. Cattelan, like all the best clowns, is a tragedian who makes our certainties as slippery as a banana peel.”
Except, at the end of the say, this clown jumps back into the clown car and drives to the bank to deposit several hundred thousand dollars.
What a tragedy.
4
As the Dutch did with the Tulip, we now seem to do with art. Too much money in the world and nowhere to put it for those who seemed to be able to afford it.
4
Mr. Cattelan is relevant as an artist not because of his "willingness to implicate himself within the economic, social and discursive systems that structure how we see and what we value." That is taking way too much for granted and is way too prescriptive, as well as antiquated. He is relevant as an artist because he has found a way to insert himself into the institutions that regulate the discourse of (fine) art. Which is not to say that he is relevant per se. The last historically relevant art was probably made in the late 1970s.
2
Duchamp is turning over in his standard-looking (but subtly modified) coffin.
3
Somewhere, on a far away planet, an alien just removed his eye from his high powered telescope, turned to his boss, and said, "nah, not worth invading for this species."
Thank you, Mr. Cattelan.
We owe you the world.
7
I'm not sure there's a more pointless question than "Is this art?" To some people it's art, to others it's a banana on the wall. I'm inclined to call it art, but, honestly, why do YOU care?
1
I'm not sure I understand your conclusion, sir. By 'implicate himself within the systems that structure what we value' do you mean he has skin in the game? He can either profit or not from his art? Are you saying Banksy can't lose money? Or are you saying that, at least we know who Mr. Cattelan is while the identity of Banksy remains elusive?
For a lot of art in general, when the market for art is nearly 100% sustained by other artists the art takes on a form that is largely inaccessible for most people. For example, the majority of people who really enjoy contemporary jazz are other jazz musicians, most people suffer ear fatigue (yes guys, throw in another minor ninth with a flat five, that sounds great!). The New Yorker publishes word puzzles in every issue while never posting the solution to these puzzles. They get away with calling it poetry presumably because the only people who appreciate these poems are other poets. (I love The New Yorker, but honestly I only understand about 1 out of every 10 poems. I guess that makes me a Philistine. But, I'm fine with that because I'd rather die then pretend I understand a poem when I actually don't. And why should I spend time guessing when I don't know what the answer is?)
Lastly, a duct-taped banana going for north of $100K doesn't merely signal that we live in a decadent society, it signals a recession is likely around the corner.
6
It’s neither art nor funny.
10
120k is enough money to change a whole family’s life forever. Art or not, whoever bought that thing is worth the disdain.
24
@Roman
What about the guy who bought the latest da Vinci for $450 million?
5
It’s enough money to provide rehab for opioid addicted youth at a credible institution. It could have saved a life.
Kudos to the artist (or “self-promoting wag” if you’re a Professional Critic) who ate the banana. It was act of fair play to interact with this piece, as far as I’m considered. Eating that banana certainly exposes the absurdity of buying...whatever it is you get when you spend $120,000 on a banana plastered to some drywall.
9
Honey, it is a banana held in place by duct tape. I can buy both at my local supermarket for approximately $6.00.
Art? Or the pretension of would-be intellectuals?
10
Imagine a national newspaper not only running story after story of a banana gorilla-taped to a wall, but also defending it as 'more than just very expensive fruit'. How shameful.
6
@Indisk
I don’t claim to “get” this as art, but by your reckoning, a Pollock is just a mess of oil and pigment on a rag.
Sorry Mr. Farago: Sometimes it just cannot be justified. It's not even "anyone can do it but nobody did"--because Walter Matthau did it in "The Odd Couple" but it was a plate of spaghetti, or as Jack Lemon corrected him "That's not spaghetti, it's linguine!"
To which Matthau appropriately replied, after throwing it against the wall, "Now it's garbage!"
This is garbage. I LIKE abstract art, even visual puns and double meanings. Picasso's "Bull's Head" from a bicycle seat and handlebars is clever and meaningful. Al Held's "The Big N" (at MOMA) had me baffled till I saw the title, then I started to laugh! I don't see either as deep, but definitely clever and entertaining.
"Comedian" is just what everyone (except pretentious art critics and art history majors) think it is: A scam. The Emperor's New Clothes. And is this age of Trump, we should be more wary of scams. Cattelan may be a real artist but that doesn't mean this is art.
In fact, while not a fan of "Performance Art", I think the performance artist who grabbed Cattelan's banana and ate it made far more of an artistic statement than this so-called "piece".
9
The real art here is the artist's ability to convince enough people it is art to create the illusion that it has value and importance enough to make some foolish person spend all that money on it. In art classes these days, instructors ask students to describe what they were thinking when they created their art. "What was your intention?" they ask. "What are you trying to say?" I find these questions strange and hard to answer. I doubt when I am working on a creation, whether drawing, painting, photography or even a song, I am thinking anything at all, instead of simply enjoying the creative process. Thought is not a part of it at all but clearly, being able to find the right words to describe it is a valuable skill to learn.
7
That’s called con art. Which is not art, it’s an art(ful trade of deception). It has nothing to do with your genuinely artistic process of creating something.
3
@SKantSki
"Con Art"! Great name! All you need to make it work is a sucker, preferable a rich sucker.
As W.C. Fields used to to say: "You can't cheat an honest man, but never give a sucker an even break, and don't wisen up a chump!"
2
Unbelievable, this Maurizio Cattelan fellow is genius A banana and a three-four inch tape for $12k to $150K!
I wish I had read this before I tossed a Pomegranate that fell to the kitchen floor and split. By last evening there were fruit flies hovering around and partaking. I could have done a live performance art piece and could have sold it for double what Cattelan did. Will Art Basel consider my piece? I can dig it out of the trash and be on the next flight to Miami, I have plenty of other ideas with rotting fruit, milk products, meat...
8
Why has any time been spent covering this joke masquerading as art? It shows that gullible people with money can be talked into throwing their money away on nonsense.
6
If history is to guide us here, the fact that the assertion 'this is not art' has rung out so loudly tends to suggest that this banana is indeed an artwork. Half jokes aside, I find quite silly the oppositions between a banana and the Sistine chapel. This whole ordeal has generated for me more enjoyment and aesthetic pleasure than many canvases that currently hang in the Prado, Louvre or Tate. Therefore, I find some of the claims about so-called real art in this comment section about as insulting as you might have found this banana to your own sensibilities. Perhaps now is a good time to exercise some aesthetic humility, to borrow a term from philosopher Bence Nanay, because it's not like any of us here have cracked the cultural mystery that is Art. There is more going on here than that which meets the eye. Art is about power, politics, and ethics, about culture, technology, and economics. This banana has a lot to say about each of these.
6
All art is genuine Expression. All expression is not art, especially "ironically conceptual" art. I think the dividing line is that for expression to be art, I have to want to see it, in person, many times. Modern art that leaves mean saying, 'I get the concept, but I never need to see THAT again" makes me know I've seen expression and not art.
6
"What makes Mr. Cattelan a compelling artist. . . . is precisely Mr. Cattelan’s willingness to implicate himself within the economic, social and discursive systems that structure how we see and what we value."
If Mr. Cattelan has sins to atone for, selling bananas for $120,000 a pop is a strange way to go about it.
1
I’m going shopping tomorrow morning after dropping my kids off at school. Bananas are on my list as we have run out. I would applaud, with enthusiasm, if the produce stockers taped a banana to the wall! Bravo and well done, with sarcasm and irony. (and $15 per hour).
4
He should've called it "Treasure", so that everyone could say one man's trash is in fact another man's treasure.
3
Has ANYONE yet noted on the Instagram feed of The Sylvester, a Miami lounge, the owner's spoof on "The Benana?"
Check that spelling - the owner (subject) is Ben Potts.
Yours for perhaps even less than $120,000.
2
I don’t know, this a banana we are talking about here.
2
Apparently I have an art installation on my kitchen counter right now.
15
Any thoughts on potential resale value?.
3
I am a long time fan of Cattelan's work and have spent the last week trying to explain the concept and framework of "The Comedian" to my students. I am also a long time fan of Banksy and disagree with your characterization of him. On another point, there are many artists (myself included) who would welcome the opportunity to "implicate themselves within" the system of the established art world. Surely you are aware of how prohibitive and exclusive that prospect can be. I applaud Banksy for choosing to operate outside those privileged confines by choice-which to me makes him all the more relatable. portfolio:mjcanziani.com
6
This piece of art has a peel!
17
I don’t care whether it’s art or not. This whole farce demonstrates why the billionaire class serves no useful purpose and needs to be taxed out of existence.
11
I would just like to to point out that the banana is not "suspended" from the wall with duct tape, it is "affixed" to the wall with duct tape. If you're going to go through the effort of defending this low effort garbage you should at least get your terminology right.
10
Duchamp played this trick nearly 100 years ago, this is unoriginal, redundant, I guess so is the so called art world.
7
@The rightful organizer...
I used to dance with the great modern dancer Erick Hawkins who was a recipient of the Presidential Medal Of Freedom.
He used to repeatedly say... regarding the world of modern Art... that "just because something is possible doesn't necessarily make it desirable."
4
Fruit for thought.
12
I was at Art Basel Miami Beach a few days ago and was more than ever struck by how ugly, pretentious, and banal (take your pick of adjectives) most of what's called "contemporary art" really is. That it continues to be promoted by so much champagne and caviar, so gazed at by so many self-regarding, black-clad people who should know better, and command such stupefying prices testifies to the wisdom of P.T. Barnum's remark that "there's a sucker born every minute." God bless the banana eater.
9
The next time an artist criticizes taxpayers for an unwillingness to support “art” this article will make a concise rebuttal.
11
OK, you lost me. Sure, I'd love to have a rotting banana in my house.
I do not know much about art (OK, let's say zero), but when I toured the Buckingham Palace art gallery hall, I could not tear myself away from it.
Aha! I thought. So this is why people are fascinated by true artists.
4
This was indeed bemusing and guffaw-worthy. But it does beg the question: what is NOT art (or "art")?
1
How about this for art?A box into which people inclined to pay $120k for a banana, duct tape, and some poster board instead deposit checks in equivalent amounts to feed Syrian refugees. they could get a Polaroid picture of them doing that in front of the banana, and this “artist” could sign it.
3
And to think, all this time, when I have spotted bananas, I've been baking banana bread.
10
@Debbie OMG, I literally just spat my drink out.Hilarious.
3
Tom Wolfe must be laughing from the grave. Did this artist read a The Painted Word. An essay that predicted this over forty years ago.
3
A taped banana by itself isn't art. However, when it is surrounded by a crowd of self-indulgent narcissists, it does offer a very meaningful commentary on our society and its elites.
38
A photo of the scene you describe would be worth hanging on a barbershop wall. I’d pay $60 for a well cropped, framed photo entitled:
“A Banana and Human Garbage”.
1
The fact that it comes with a certificate of authenticity so that the buyer can replace the banana just shows that the buyer is purchasing the certificate, not the “art”. And just because something is expensive doesn’t make it art.
3
Every other booth should have also gaffered a banana to the wall in an act of solidarity.
5
Marcel Duchamp, Andy Warhol. They used the readymade at a time and in a way that changed the conversation and understanding of what constitutes art. Everyone after them is derivative and just silly.
2
I'm sorry- no amount of fancy words will cover up that we are a depraved and deranged "culture". And, I think this commentary totally avoids and misses the real reason for outrage--- there are people willing to pay $150,000 for a banana and a piece of duct tape. Sorry--- for many people on this planet $150,000 is likely the difference between life and death. That these people are willing to spend that much on a banana-- rather than going to a local church so see if an elderly person freezing to death needs their $100 heating bill paid-- that is an outrage.
20
You express a profoundly humane perspective with which I am in complete sympathy. And the questions you raise are not restricted to this work of art alone. Whenever we consider the price of a work of art we can also ask about the corresponding cost to society. Wherever anyone buys a work of art to some extent all of society pays.
1
@Stan Sutton An artist works and deserves to be paid the same way actors, and sports people, and such are. They spend years training and it takes, usually, exceptional talent and soul to produce something meaningful, even if that meaning is joy to the soul. Thank god for the people that were patrons of the old masters. However, sticking a banana on the wall is not art - it's a banana on the wayll.
@BNYgal I understand that artists generally have need for a livelihood. If they can earn that livelihood--even a high standard of living--from patronage by people who find value in works of art, then I think that's great, both for the artists and the patrons. On the other hand, most of the money that is invested in art does not go to the artists, and much of the art that is most economically valuable is not available to be enjoyed by most people. It's when art serves mainly as a medium for extreme wealth that I think we ought to start questioning our values.
I would pay $120,000 for someone's lunch taped to a wall just to watch people's heads explode. Thankfully, I don't have that kind of money.
3
The only noteworthy element in this trio of imagery is the Art Basil Miami Beach venue. It’s all window dressing.
2
@Jill
Basil? Parsley?
4
As Orwell said in another context: One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool."
I'm glad someone ate it before it went bad. I hope he didn't eat the duct tape.
9
I have always had one criterion when it comes to art - if I can do it, it ain't art. I am pretty sure that even I can duct tape a banana to a wall.
Now what would be *really* interesting would be to duct tape a grape to a wall since you would not be able to actually see the grape, thus creating all sorts of mystery.
5
Try this at home- place two grapes side by side in your microwave for 30 seconds. Turn the lights off. You should see an arc of light!
By 1920, the Dadaists had pretty much exhausted this version of artistic parody. A banana on the wall falls well short of Duchamp’s “Fountain”.
10
I am sure there are already educational courses being written on this work. Museums will clamor to include it in exhibitions. Ultimately it will end up being the most instagrammed art work ever created. It will live on. Forever. And the world will thirst to view it. And promptly dismiss it with a simple click of their tongues. And never realize we are all a part of the work. We are all "The Comedian". And the joke is on us.
7
Fruitless to me, though fruit be here to excess
3
My first thought was no thought...suspension of thought...then disbelief, and similar negative comments to others. Then, I thought about all organizations that could use $120K to help our fellow suffering humans or animals. Next I was sad followed by a bit of anger at what we have evolved or rather devolved into in 2019 when a museum would put a banana duct taped to a wall in their museum and that someone would pay $120K for it.
6
Amusing article, but the real swindlers are non-artists telling us what art should be taken seriously and what should not. If it connects with you, isn’t that enough?
4
Dear Daniel Clarke,
Not really, the people telling us what should not be taken seriously cannot be swindlers, because they are not trying to sell us anything or trick us into anything.
This banana on a wall doesn't connect with anyone except for the message that people who buy this kind of conceptual art with no aesthetic merit are fools. It's not art. And this isn't an attempt to con you into spending your money on something worthless, whereas the banana is.
5
First of all, those telling us who we should take seriously are being remunerated for their opinion, so they are in effect selling something. Secondly, sometimes the most enduring art is little more than an idea. I would take a real banana over a Jeff Koons bouquet of tulips that cost $4m to create, because at least I do like bananas.
1
It's not the banana and duct tape what is important. What is important is that Mauricio Cattelan is a brand. Artists started selling themselves starting in the 1980s, regardless of the quality of their work.
7
Help! Can someone translate this for me?
"Actually, real artists are not out to hoodwink you. What makes Mr. Cattelan a compelling artist, and what makes Banksy a tedious and culturally irrelevant prankster, is precisely Mr. Cattelan’s willingness to implicate himself within the economic, social and discursive systems that structure how we see and what we value. It makes sense that an artist would find those systems dispiriting, and the duct-taped banana, like the suspended horse, might testify to his and all of our confinement within commerce and history. In that sense, the title “Comedian” is ironic — for Mr. Cattelan, like all the best clowns, is a tragedian who makes our certainties as slippery as a banana peel."
...I was waiting for the punchline for why this banana is art, but sadly I'm too dumb to understand even when it's explained to me.
14
I ate a banana today, or I thought I did, or maybe didn’t or I dreamt it. And the banana didn’t taste very good because someone took a bite out of it before I did and that person had bad teeth so I will probably have to see a good periodontist to get some major work done; or was it a dog that took out a piece of the banana before I did so I’ll need to get a rabies shot.
2
And yet, I wonder if he had simply scribbled to the side
"this is not a banana duct-taped to a wall"
would that have tipped the balance toward it being art?
5
I don't know, but I think if he had painted a hyper-realistic, three-dimensional banana duct-taped to a wall, that could have been art.
2
This is the denouement of the postmodern era. I support local artists, purchase art and create art. I have to say that the postmodern ethos has exposed some of the unsavory ethics of the art world. There are very talented artists working in many media whose beautiful compositions deserve $120,000––and continued patronage. I get that there has to be comedy in art, and art taken too seriously is just as dangerous from an ethics perspective. I also have purchased challenging art and made postmodern art. But this requires no skill.
5
What a scam - that's all I have to say. It demeans actual artists. So much of so called contemporary "art" isn't worthy of adulation, much less someone paying money for it. It's silly.
5
.. a fool and his (or her) money..
3
Welp, at least the "my kid could do that" clearly does not apply here. There's no way your kid could turn a banana into $120,000.
So this proves it is art. By that logic.
6
I’m pretty sure a kid can duct tape a banana to a wall. The kid has to be famous though for the 120k.
2
@JF
Exactly
2
When I think of all the artists working at what amounts to less than minimum wage to produce their works, this $120,000 snub of the art world is beyond offensive.
5
"Banksy’s juvenile, notably British stance satisfies a dismayingly common belief that all artists are con artists, and that museums, collectors and critics are either dupes or hustlers. Indeed, it’s exactly because of frauds like Banksy that audiences believed Mr. Cattelan arranged the theft of his own gilded commode in September, as if every artist was putting something over."
What?
How can you call Banksy a fraud? Is it because his art takes on political meanings that even the lower classes can understand and appreciate as opposed to the upper snobs who think their educations outweigh our competence in understanding art? There is much abstract art out there that is total bonkers, but even people like me can appreciate the depth and creativity surrounding it. This, however - a banana taped to a wall - is exactly what the "juvenile" Banksy was highlighting. 120k for a Banana taped to a wall. Look in the mirror and say that to yourself. Wake up, man.
13
Thank you for saying exactly what I want to say! Hear, hear! Banksy is a brilliant artist that in no way deserves this ridiculous criticism.
1
Yes, they took it down because “crowds like these” were making things difficult for everybody. I can’t help but notice the continuation of the equation of women and despicable mass culture.
I remember being in one museum somewhere once, every wall was painted white and people dutifully kept their socially correct distance as they move around the gallery, until that is they came to the fire extinguisher hanging on the wall. Genius! Everyone gasped as the came to a complete awestruck halt, completely ruining the collective contemplative experience.
If a banana is $120k, and Lucille Bluth thought its price was ten dollars, she was off by a factor of 5 (5.0792, to be exact), not of 10,000. Art is subjective, math is not.
5
I was just at Art Basel. I have been to the show at least 10 times
Someone scribbled on the wall “Epstein was murdered“ or something like that. I don’t recall.
Had not security surrounded it and tried to hide it from public view, I think no one would have noticed it.
Instead the crowd swarmed to see what was going on.
Had they just put a price tag on it, No one would have cared.
That’s Art Basel for you.
8
Warhol would smile slightly.
6
I'm working on a sculpture involving grapes and thumbtacks.
8
Puh-leez!
4
The banana was an obvious joke.
Eating it was a joke.
Both mildly amusing.
Question is: what does this say about the rest of the “work” at this shindig? Think how useless all of it must have been for anyone to have treated the joke as anything but.
2
I guess there are worse things than keeping Duchamp's running joke going for year 102. No need to look for anything more than that.
Anyone defending this as art, taking its picture, or even spending more than 10 seconds discussing its merits should be embarrassed. This is the big trouble with the art world today, maybe for the last 4 decades. Put something, anything, in a white-walled room, and it becomes art, according to the art world. There's so much of this kind of stuff---conceptual nonsense masquerading as a thoughtful piece---that it's made Art really depressing, cheap (I don't mean price-wise), and fraudulent. The entire modern art circle of artist-critic-buyer is too often one big scam. Mostly, thankfully, they only con themselves.
340
@Umberto "As to why Mr. Cattelan’s banana has gripped the public imagination"....only for those whose intelligence is equal to their shoe size...Mr. Farago you just spent 1500 words on dissecting the cultural importance of a banana duct-taped to a wall. Get real. The joke is on you. Hopefully, you realize this.
41
@Umberto
It's titled "Comedian".
In this age of industrialized wonder, about 3.1 million children die of undernutrition every year. About 1.3 billion tons of produce is unconsumed and discarded every year.
And someone just bought a banana for $120,000.
Not all satire needs words to be impactful.
32
@Umberto - the buyers aren't being conned; they need somewhere to park their money and it's more convenient than buying gold bars. As long as the resale value stays high they are happy.
6
Becoming bored reading the commentary, I am reminded of “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” Maybe the author’s review should have only included the aforementioned quote, and NOTHING more.
1
Actually a cigar is always a sexual reference. Every single time.
@Dan Stackhouse Actually, a banana can be too.
1
It’s great to have people getting all riled up over an art object! I actually like this sculpture and appreciate the Times’ art critic’s take on the piece and the hullabaloo surrounding it. Well done all around!
10
The turn to trashing Banksy at the end of this article was really odd.
10
Really, it does matter that there are people for whom a necessary supply of insulin is nightmarishly expensive. Mocking such people is a bit much.
I'm selling original copies. Contact me to purchase.
6
You think Banksy is a tedious and culturally irrelevant prankster but this guy is relevant? I think you’re either the tedious and irrelevant prankster or an ostentatious dupe. Either way your trying to defend this as art is as wrong headed as spending 120 grand on a banana. And, oh, the duct tape. Let’s not forget the all important duct tape.
11
The reason this is not worth $120,000 is because I can take a banana and a piece of duct tape and recreate it in 3 seconds.
Can works of art be successfully copied? That's a question that's been debated at length. But when copying a work of art is this easy, then it means that there was absolutely no artistry in making it, so the only thing about it you can call art is the concept. And the concept is just a joke, or a gag, and thus is not worth $120,000, in my opinion. You are welcome to buy it, but in my eyes you'd be a fool.
It's nice for Mr. Farago that he was so stimulated by looking at this banana and duct-tape (how can we forget to mention the duct tape? what genius!), but it tells us more about his pretentions than about the "artwork".
12
Not to mention that this ‘concept’ has been done before. Repeatedly.
6
@gus But you didn’t.
2
"What makes Mr. Cattelan a compelling artist, and what makes Banksy a tedious and culturally irrelevant prankster, is..."
What makes an actual artist an actual artist, and what makes Jason Fargo a supercilious observer masquerading as an informed critic, is recognizing the difference between the creation of work that is dangerous and meaningful and calls one to account for one's own perception of its worth ... and taping a banana to a wall.
Shame on you, sir.
13
I have three words for you: hammer and sickle.
2
As with everything else in an ever-commercial world, everything is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.
2
I don’t know...I kind of love it. A work of art that requires so much attention form the owner, to watch for decay “every 7-10 days” and then participate in the continuation of the sculpture by replacing the banana. Is it worth that much? It’s only up to the buyers to say and they did.
7
@Diana Toole And those buyers are going to love the flies and gnats those bananas will attract.
1
Oh, please, Louise.
2
I resent the Banksy comments. Let me enjoy his wit and acidic commentary please, it's so much more fun than reading art criticism which seems eternally entangled with the marketplace and an enemy of the English language. I like Mr. Cattelan's work too and find it equally witty and well executed. The banana is my least favorite, possibly because of the lack of skill required to make it. You can't win 'em all.
5
The banana is obviously an amazing sculpture by the world's greatest artist. Nature.
14
Dear John Doe,
Funny, but not actually true. The banana is the result of thousands of years of human meddling, and it barely resembles the earlier product of evolution.
1
As a good and very wealthy friend once told me :" It´s only money "
1
Easy to say if you’re rich.
1
@JM
Exactly
Maybe there is truth to Elizabeth Warren going after big money- I can’t fathom that anybody would have bought this “piece of art” for any other reason than their wanting to dump excess money.
6
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and in this case it was also in the stomach of a hungry performance artist.
2
If you say you are an artist, whatever you call art, is art. There is no disputing this. It is an artist's right.
Whether it is good or bad art, that is entirely a different inquiry and line of thought. Leave the subjective opinion up to art critics, other artists, and the public (leave out the market place, that's not an evaluation, rather commerce.)
2
Dear Frank,
Baloney. If one says one is an artist, that is also baloney. It can only be proven by action, not claimed. People demonstrate they are artists by creating things that others find beautiful, inspiring, or things that transmit a message. This is just a banana some dope duct-taped to a wall. Anyone could do this. It is not art.
2
I think he should have used gorilla tape. That would have gotten at least $150,000!
By the way, I have an old motorcycle seat that's torn, but repaired with a little duct tape. Anyone interested?
4
Come Mr. tally man, tally me banana.
Daylight come and I want to go home
4
The banana identifies as the Mona Lisa.
20
Is the NY Times art critic Jason Farago truly serious? He states "Mr. Cattelan a compelling artist, and what makes Banksy a tedious and culturally irrelevant prankster, is precisely Mr. Cattelan’s willingness to implicate himself within the economic, social and discursive systems that structure how we see and what we value."
Huh? Even if anyone can truly decipher that sentence, Farago's own comment on Banksy selling a print with the title “I Can’t Believe You Morons Actually Buy This ….” (The title has one unprintable last word" is precisely descriptive of the 'moron' paying $120,000 for a banana stuck on a wall with duct tape.
At least Banksy has the honesty to call it what it really is. The 'banana' is only art ... or food for the monkeys who believe it so.
19
The banana taped to a wall is not the interesting part. The interesting part was not even addressed - who bought it?
2
Very interesting - except for one thing --
Back in May or 2016, the Times published an article about two California teenagers who - while attending an exhibition at a modern-art gallery - were so unimpressed they decided to try it for themselves --
One of the teens placed his eyeglasses on the floor in front of an empty wall - and then stood by as people begin seriously viewing the glasses - while engaging in discussions - making notes - and taking photographs -- some down on the floor at eye level --
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/31/arts/sfmoma-glasses-prank.html
One is reminded of the story about The Emporer's New Clothes...
31
To paraphrase Freud,
"Sometimes a Banana is just a banana"
...for those smart enough not to pay $150,000 for one.
For those who do, a psychiatrist is in order...
10
The difference between Duchamp's readymades and Cattelan banana is the same difference between an early cubist painting by Picasso or Braque and a cubist painting done by an artist today in 2019. The concept of the art piece is more that 100 years old. The banana taped to the wall is not original conceptually. Also it lacks the mystery and the wit that surrounded Duchamp's work. (The fountain somehow lacks that mystery and ambiguity, therefor I am leaning to the theory - and proofs- that Duchamp did not conceive the idea of the urinal as art, but probably one of two of his female artist friends; he just presented it and defended it and later on, took credit for it because everyone thought it was his idea. Cattelan has done some interesting pieces , but this one is not one of them. As a commentary about the stupidity of the art world it works but sadly it contributes to the same stupidity and mediocrity that prevails and dominates.
3
My personal take on this is, if someone has so much money that they won't miss it if they spend it on this banana, then maybe they should do something productive like taking that $120K and feeding the hungry. With bananas, if that's what floats their boat.
9
On my iPad, right below this article, is Andrea Fraser’s piece on “Art” and the whole swirl around it. It makes this banana, well, watch the video. Perfect juxtaposition.
1
Where's the proof that anyone actually paid $120,000 for this? A gallery posting price, and a critic citing the posting, aren't proof. Maybe the gallery and the artist are just sharing a joke.
6
Apparently there was not just one but 3 separate purchasers of the limited edition series.
2
The fruit flies had probably gotten a "head start" on it anyway.
2
Is this a joke? of course it is- and the joke is on us- or anybody, who actually thinks this is art- it is laughable
7
If you ask me, you cannot own art.
You can make art or appreciate art. But, you cannot really own it. Anything you own is an investment, not art.
1
The "art" world is filled with
1) Scam artists, and
2) People who desperately want to be scammed.
7
You know this makes Trump supporters look sophisticated, right?
5
@Chris Not everything is about Trump
Whether something is or isn’t about Trump is often dependent upon Trump’s seemingly arbitrary decision whether to actively make that “something” about him. The original poster here simply took out the middle-man.
(And not for nothing but the man is president and his whims have a hand in shaping the lives of everyone on this planet, and we live on this planet, so I’ll allow it).
Maybe its one of those questions you get when applying for a job a to Google as in " your starving and broke and all you have is a banana and duct tape...what do you do?
11
Sometimes, a banana is just a banana.
236
@Jeffrey Waingrow
Actually this banana does symbolize something more than a banana, but not in the way this critic intended.
When millions of people in America are struggling to afford shelter, food, and/or medication, someone was willing to spend $120,000 for a banana.
What’s sad is that the NYT, which fancies itself a progressive paper, is trying to justify it.
36
This is the best comment! Concise and to the point. Mauricio should have taped an elephant to the wall. At least he would have been in league with Dali,.
3
@Jeffrey Waingrow
Wait. A banana is, sometimes (not always ... occasionally? Most of the time?) just a banana?
So, wait. When it is sometimes not a banana, is it an apple? Is it limited to only being an apple, or can it be an orange too?
Oh- this isn’t good.
Are you trying to suggest there is more to a banana “sometimes” when sometimes it is not “just a banana”, or something less?
Are you creating a false equivalency between the lesser banana it might be when it is not just a banana, and the banana it is when it is just a banana?
I think you’re up to no good. “A banana is just a banana.” Ha! Nice try, bud.
12
I see the banana as a piece of performance art, not a sculpture. This work then includes the throngs who lined up to photograph the fruit, the artist who ate the fruit, and the wonderful words of humor in these very comments. Thank you all!
7
@LAR
Deep ...
Mr. Cattelan's artwork with respect to his banana piece includes every action that reacts to it, including this piece of journalism and reader comments.
That's how it is with conceptual art: it is made of ideas. Not unprecedented. Not an interesting example of conceptual art, in my opinion. But the controversy is now part of the work, which helps. Good for Mr. Cattelan.
1
Anyone can tape a banana to a wall (l may install one myself for the holiday season). To pay that amount is just to tell people that you could.
It’s not art by itself. It’s only art because of the ludicrousness (including the 120k price tag) of the reactions it draws.
5
After we had a self-destroying picture it is only appropriate that a passing "artist" removed the banana and ate it.
1
The reason this work was so expensive was because the purchaser was not merely buying a piece of duct tape and a banana, but also the entire wall to which it was taped. The cost of hiring a carpenter, and then a cleanup crew, must’ve been enormous.
2
“The first mistake of art is to assume that it's serious.”
Lester Bangs
4
The comments in this article highlight more about NYT readers feelings about the importance of art, than they do about art in question.
hey jason. my first impression of the banana DUCK TAPED to the wall was a big smile and, great "Velvet Underground & Nico" album. I love your interpretation of this. This, this duct taped banana is something to me. And I expect, NOTHING to you. Perfect.
1
What nonsense! If I couldn't see the url in the address bar, I would think I was reading "The Onion" or the "Harvard Lampoon".
Tom Wolfe addressed this kind of pretense and pretentiousness in "From Bauhaus to Our House". If only he were around to respond to this. . . .
2
Re: Dan Flavin
It's not just any light bulb that can replace one that goes out.
They are custom made and you will need to buy a dozen.
That will probably set you back 500. - 800.
1
Well, I saw it. And you are correct: it’s not just a banana. It is a banana duct taped to the wall. I did not take a photo. I walked on. I think more people should have.
6
People in America, people with jobs, are sleeping in tents, their children going hungry. We are cutting food stamps, school lunches, disability payments. $120,000 bananas are an obscenity. As a nation, we should be embarassed. Donate the money to helping fellow humans. This is not "art". It is the "Emperor's New Clothes", tropical fruit version. SHAME, SHAME, SHAME.
7
Math error - bananas cost about 10 cents apiece, so Lucille Bluth's guess is off by a factor of only 100, not 10,000.
Or maybe this error is part of the art of the article and the joke's on me.
2
@David It's a reference to the banana selling for $120,000.
@Lily - No, it's a statement about what Lucille Bluth said about the cost of bananas and the number the author used to put it in context.
"...all artists are con artists, and that museums, collectors and critics are either dupes or hustler."
Bingo.
1
It wasn't a banana on the wall. It was a mirror.
16
There is exactly one person who knows what goes into the making of a piece of art- the person who makes it. Art critics can say whatever they want but it’s all nonsense. They are just looking for a way to make money they don’t deserve. If a critic actually knew what went into making a piece of art, they wouldn’t be writing about somebody else’s- they’d be creating it themselves! I am a musician and only I know what my intentions are and how hard I work to produce music.
If this “critic” can’t tell the difference between a banana taped to a wall and something that has artistic value, it’s a very sad commentary about where we are as a society. And believe me, I know first-hand. I live in the Miami area and it is truly a cultural wasteland.
5
When the banana rots, as bananas are known to do, and the new owner replaces the rotten banana with a new one, is the owner committing copyright fraud?
6
"Maurizio Cattelan is more than a prankster, and 'Comedian,' his potassium-rich latest work, is more than an overpriced piece of fruit, our ENABLER writes."
There, fixed that for ya'.
3
I burst out laughing, just at the price tag and buyer. But then I had to stop laughing and think about the sheer genius of the work.
I believe I get it now, it was at the Miami Beach Mnuchin Gallery. His son is the Treasury Secretary. No connection of course. However this decadent work of art suggests Trump will carry the Sunshine State handily if the decadent people here routinely toss away $100K for a rotting piece of fruit taped to a wall. Ergo Trump gets his second term because Florida is often a bellwether state in 2020.
Yes, I get that point. And the fact that everything is pricey in South Beach / Art Deco district for a reason. It's necessary to launder that decadent cash for the lucrative cocaine economy.
But where exactly do they drain the swamp during the King Tides? All the four cardinal points of Miami Beach are overflowing, up and down is already taken. Follow the guy with the $100K banana, there has to be another dimension! something I don't.
1
Too bad the banana was not left to rot in place, now that would have been art.
2
Another example of the frivolous 1% mocking those that have to think twice about spending frivolous $1.20. Absolute mockery of art and human advancement. Good laughs are usually free and really good things don't come with huge $$$ before them....lots of bad things and bad jokes seem to.
3
"(I am sparing you a lecture on the Guatemalan coup d’état of 1954, and the origin of the phrase “banana republic”….)"
Why do you have to be so smug and psuedo-intellectual? Critics are the worst, especially music critics but art critics too. Have you ever even made a piece of art? What can you say about the creative process?
I LIKE some contemporary art, but what's really impressive is Mr. Farago's ability to pen a full length story that is utterly devoid of anything meaningful or insightful. Way to go Jason!
6
@Kyle
Kyle, Mr. Farago, offered a thought provoking argument. You have limited yourself to negations. I obviously found the argument more interesting. I await your well sculpted and full bodied essay on any of your nano-sneerings. Art critics and banana republics in the context of infertility offers rich possibilities.
The only genius thing about it is that Cattelan got someone to pay $120,000 for a banana and a piece of duct tape.
198
@Lex - that's a lot harder than you make it sound. I know I couldn't sell a banana and a piece of duct tape for that much. Also, in fact he got THREE people to pay $120,000 for a banana and a piece of duct tape... and, more importantly, the certificate of authenticity.
The certificate of authenticity is the important thing. Without that, it's just a banana. But with the certificate, it holds a $120,000 value. Think of it like a bitcoin. The value is the value. The thing itself is nothing.
19
@Anthony Flack
You're right--he had to find not just one but THREE suckers willing to pay $120,000 for it!
I guess that's the "art" in it--finding the suckers and fleecing them!
But I certainly don't admire anything more than his chutzpah.
6
@Anthony Flack I like that, like a bitcoin.
4
The rich have too much money. It’s time for that to end.
19
When does this circular argument stop? And where? The twisted humor behind this special banana accurately exposes the cynicism (and nihilism) that the art market has become. In many respects, especially concerning social and economic conditions, this current era is not that much different, or better, than that saccharin, shallow and self-serving period of English sentimentalism that flourished in the 1890’s. It took the violence of World War to correct that same concentration of wealth and shake them from that stupor. It’s a correction I’m not looking forward to.
2
Somehow this reminds me of the lines of tourists who take selfies of their reflections in The Bean at Millennium Park here in Chicago.
The banana split.
8
I just can't see a banana duct-taped to a wall as being art. It's like if I take a hammer and tie a scarf around it, that's not art, it's just an odd juxtaposition of ordinary objects. The suspended exhibit by Mr. Cattelan does strike me as being art, although not a piece I particularly like. It's trying to make a statement, it has an odd aesthetic, it's different than the norm.
But the banana, that's just stupid. If anyone bought it, they're an idiot.
119
@Dan Stackhouse
A scarf around a hammer?! Genius!
34
You said it first! Tie a tie around a hammer! That’s great!
9
@Dan Stackhouse And the rest of us somehow made it possible for that idiot to have $120,000 in chump change lying around to waste on a banana. Something wrong with the system, as Scott in Illyria pointed out elsewhere in this Comment section.
14
The “critic” didn’t see the “sculpture”, and hey it’s not just a banana, there’s duct tape too. But somehow Banksy is a fraud and one has to wonder, has the critic actually viewed Banksy’s work in person?
He didn’t even bother to visit the banana. Just read about it before writing that preachy puff piece.
Who is the fraud? Perhaps the critic should look in the mirror.
11
@John Adams
Oh, so true. How can anyone possibly critique the high art of a banana without actually being there to experience it? Good call! Fraud!
4
I could see how there's no reason to visit the banana in person, because it's just an ordinary object in a setting that anyone could create themselves in about three seconds. But that's why it isn't art, and doesn't deserve this kind of grudging defense.
"I'm always looking outside, trying to look inside. Trying to tell something that's true. But maybe nothing is really true except what's out there. And what's out there is always different".
-Robert Frank, Home Improvements, 1985
Art Basel, like Miami, survives on hype. I can't be the only one that thinks the banana-duct-taped-to-the-wall-and-selling-for-an-absurd-price story was concocted by a publicist, either the artist's or the fair's. There's plenty of art, and some of it great, in Miami this week but the banana isn't it.
7
Let's see. Nothing aesthetically appealing about it. No effort to make. No matter what the "artist" claims there is no "process" in duct taping a banana. Idiots willing to spend $120,000 on what any normal human being could get for less than $1 at Walmart. Sounds like art to me!
4
They’re usually 59 cents a pound at Walmart. Ten cents more for organic.
@Max Deitenbeck
2 for a dollar at 7-11!
1
I think the curator, critic and Cattelan are just silly regarding this duct taped banana. I am more than happy to say the king has no clothes and this is not art but a piece of wit, spotted though it is. I'd like to see museums and galleries raise their standards and not indulge the showboating of some artists.
9
@ArtOuzel
I do agree. Now, on the other hand, if the artist had instead chosen electrical tape...
(No, I don’t know why electrical tape either. But what if it had been green duct tape ... Nope. Still nothing.).
1
So true. In that regard aren’t we all sculptures? And they all stink.
2
It’s been said for decades that duct tape can be used to fix anything. It seems to me that, because the duct tape used by the artist could not prevent the banana from aging, that the real lesson here is that duct tape is fallible.
6
@David H
Great view. Probably a lot to work with there.
The view of “fix anything” with human achievement can be overstated. It has its limitations. Does that message get any simpler than duct taping a banana to a wall? The choice of the banana (instead of a pineapple) is relevant to this point as well; the previous version of the mass market banana went extinct from over specialization. One disease killed the strain. The banana we know today is it’s replacement and it’s possible it could meet the same fate. It’s possible they even duct tape (or GMOs) won’t stop it.
So is this art? Art is just a three letter word. What is art in the Chinese language? Is it defined the same way? For thousands of years, people have held only a few tools to create “art.” With technology and advancements in science, we, as viewers, are lagging behind artists’ expressions using these tools. A banana and duct tape? Is it farce? A statement about the nature of the comedian?
Art provides an opportunity for us all to sit around pondering our navels - and discuss small and big things. Art opens the mind and relaxes the neural network for a moment, providing a pause for us all to reengage. “Is that a big banana? Why is it facing up? Is the artist a misogynist? A female? Hmmm ... wait ... I see some lint ...
1
I have been an art dealer for over 20 years. I know art. I understand art. If you have $120,000 to spend on art, please don't spend it on a banana taped to a wall. I will tell you what to buy and will not charge you a cent for that advice...at this point I would consider it my fiduciary responsibility to give you complimentary guidance.
27
@Jeffrey Gillespie
Ok.
(Note to self: Cancel check to Chiquita and Dole.)
5
The duct tape is a new look. I think it looks like the first Velvet Underground record. Truly
6
If I was the banana, I wouldn't want to be seen anywhere near these poseurs, much less have my picture taken with them. Not only do these people have more time and money than they know what to do with, they have spent none of it in educating themselves about history, art, or craftsmanship. The only "culture" they know is food, precisely because its appreciation requires nothing more than a direct connection from the taste buds to the pleasure centers of the brain, without any messy interference from the higher faculties. Where we once celebrated artists like Michelangelo, now our cultural heroes are a glut of celebrity chefs and mixologists.
8
@stan continople
I’ll drink to that!
And could you please pass that artichoke dip?)
1
I won't say that it is, or isn't, art. That's up to the individual to decide for him or her self.
What I don't get, is standing in line at an art house to see it. If you wish to marvel in wonder at a banana duct-taped to a wall, why not simply buy one yourself, duct-tape it to your own wall, and admire it at your leisure?
15
@Jason
Thank you!
(Note to self: Don’t cancel the checks to Chiquita and Dole).
2
@David H No, it would be to know from across the room that this is “a Maurizio Cattelan” and not just a banana duct taped to the wall. Looking at it closely for too long would be strange. Skeptics should look at what other art they could buy at Miami Basel for 120 and then decide if they wouldn’t want a banana instead. Relatively speaking it’s a good buy though sounds like a lot of upkeep.
1
I can't help but read the predictable dismissals of Comedian and hear, "make art great again."
1
I think the so-called artist hired the guy to come to the gallery and eat the banana. More $$$$$$and publicity
2
"What makes Mr. Cattelan a compelling artist, and what makes Banksy a tedious and culturally irrelevant prankster. . . "
This is nonsense. You could write a masters thesis on Banksy's work that self destructed upon purchase. You could write another one on whether something is or isnt art if you don't know who the artist is or if there even is one (which is, or at least was, the case for Banksy). The art is what you make of it.
And to suggest that between Cattalan and Banksy that *Banksy* the the culturally irrelevant one is also bizarre. If we're talking about cultural relevance, Cattalan doesn't hold a candle to Banksy, although Cattalan's stuff, is, I admit, generally more interesting and intellectually stimulating.
14
@Big Cow Yes, I think it is taste that the critic objects to. Cattalan has a more refined aesthetic that is favored over the proletarian Banksy. But it is instructive to see the difference. Cattalan effuses a lofty elitist stance while Banksy is in the dirt with the pigs. You can accuse Cattalan of snobbery but not Banksy. Its oranges and apples.
I understand there is also good art at Miami Basel. Too bad Mr. Farago isn't interested in writing about it.
6
@Piri Halasz
Please tell us your definition of ‘good’ art. Who are the gatekeepers who should pass such judgements? Perhaps what makes us all anxious is that we might be missing something profound..or not, and there is no neat easy rule to apply.
Perhaps the point here is to have us think beyond the obvious, and to wonder what those ruminations tells us about ourselves and our culture.
Please watch this space for my upcoming work, ‘Organic molasses, dripping unto Kim K’. I was inspired by the Got Milk ad of the 1990s.
1
@C. Jama Adams
Well, as my mentor often said, there is no "proof" of taste. Everybody, I suppose, has to be their own gatekeeper, but all I can say is that I have been looking at contemporary art for the past 50 years, and over that time, my taste has evolved from adulation of the sort of '60s art you probably now take as canonical (pop and its derivatives) to the kind of art that moves me most (most though by no means all of which is abstract painting & sculpture). You may regard this as proving I am out of touch with contemporary times. I regard it as evidence of having achieved artistic maturity.
You suggest that I should "think beyond the obvious, and wonder what these ruminations tell us about ourselves and our culture." Well, I have done a good deal of ruminating and what I conclude is that it is very hard for most people to respond to purely visual stimuli. This is an aptitude, like being able to play major-league baseball or perform brain surgery, and most people just don't have it. They have to have some kind of crutch to help them respond to art -- some kind of subject or subject matter. And because the appreciation of art is now a mass phenomenon, the subject matter gets dumb and dumber in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Since you asked me to "watch this space" for your upcoming work, let me invite you in turn to read my online column. It's called "(An Appropriate Distance) From the Mayor's Doorstep," and is easily googled.
1
The genius of Mr. Cattalan’s insight into how art buyers, gallery promoters and art critics think. They are so desperate to feel superior to everyone outside their clique and to demonstrate their artistic discernment that the more confusing a piece of art is to the outside public, the more valuable it is to the “art world”. It doesn’t matter what that they feign rapturous applause for, just as long as no one understands why they so value it.
Mark my words, within the next couple of years, some hacky experimental artist will sell a display containing nothing for hundreds of thousands of dollars, just clear air named it something like “Freedom” or “Clear Thinking” or some such rubbish and we will be back to this same discussion and there will be art critics telling us how we just don’t get it and how taken by the sheer whimsy of the piece.
8
@JSD , actually there was an artist who did just that. Learned of him in my 20th century art history class. Can't recall his name, but got at least one buyer for his invisible framed art.
@JSD
This is not about a banana or the duct tape. It's about the transaction. Follow the money.
1
... and still waiting for the outcry over whether or not this was an organic fair trade piece of fruit and the editorial about how the failure to pick a locally sourced piece is exacerbating global warming... and then there is the question of why put up the reproductive organs of a tree rather then leaves or roots...
10
I suppose Mr. Cattelan could have sold his work for the amount it cost to make instead of $120,000, but then it wouldn’t be a work of art would it?
9
The fellow who ate the banana was like the little boy who said, "The Emperor has no clothes."
3
This article is the reason I subscribe to the New York Times – NOT.
9
Banksy and the banana guy are to highbrow art what Ali G. is to journalism.
Why must it be art? Can't we just call it satire and all be happy?
7
Yes! Satire, or maybe performance art. Not really a sculpture. Personally I enjoy the work for all the thoughts and feelings and satire and other humor it is creating.
1
So much to say, so few bananas.
6
Dadaism was a mistake.
2
I’m surprised at how many ostensibly cultured and thoughtful NYTimes readers are commenting negatively here, after apparently not reading (or at least not giving much thought to) the author’s article. It’s not like what’s being said is that outrageous or hard to grasp. It seems to me that it basically boils down to this: The artwork in question is but one example of the artist’s ouevre, which is generally about the difficulty of creating sincere art in the modern world. As such, it needs to be seen — and its meaning and impact assessed — in the larger context of the artist’s other works. Which are often quite crafted and complex, and not simplistic “cons.”
In other words, there is more to this banana and duct tape than a banana and duct tape. It is part of an important artist’s ongoing project. And art collectors value it accordingly.
11
No, it’s a banana duct taped to a wall. Worthless, self-indulgent frivolity for millionaires who have more money than common sense.
3
The banana, or anything else, is worth whatever anyone is willing to pay for it.
That value has to do with the buyer's social appraisal of the maker and/or the seller.
Its as if we've completely forgotten that cash itself is nothing more than ink on paper.
2
Such a waste of a good banana.
10
@wizard149 Fortunately it wasn't wasted.
2
Just think of how much food this could have provided to the poor. To Liberal elites this means nothing.
6
@JGaltTX Who says they are liberal? Many of these speculative buyers are hedge fund bankers, and presumably, the majority of them vote Republican.
14
Yes, of course, PRESUMABLY. Says it all right there. Next!
1
Let them eat bananas.
1
"'Comedian,' his potassium-rich latest work, is more than an overpriced piece of fruit."
Shouldn't that read "was" more than an overpriced piece of fruit?
6
It's hard to take you seriously on Cattelan when you so thoroughly misunderstand Banksy. You should pay closer attention both to the seriousness of the latter's art and the actual targets of his satire.
If you understand Banksy's work, then it doesn't really look that different from Cattelan's ... except that for Banksy, the blue-chip art world is a minor target.
He dabbles in art about art / artists / art dealers / art consumers, but his broader target is the social order.
Cattelan? I don't know. But you haven't convinced me (even a little) that he's doing anything importantly different from Duchamp. The ideas that differentiate it are the stuff of footnotes.
For what it's worth, I like the piece. It's fun to look at, and it's good for a laugh. But the outsized attention, both from crusty classicists and apologists like you, is annoying and embarrassing.
10
Not to be gross, but maybe the performance artist who ate the banana can "re-gift" the banana back to Mr. Cattelan, and then it can be placed in a Ziploc bag attached to the wall and could be a collaborative effort on the concept of pluralism?
66
That that’s what I call creativity. Good for you. I too support recycling.
1
@Ned you should have eneded with in a zip-loc bag
the piece was already plural when it was hung though the gallery (dealer)
@Ned
By the standards of the people who chose/hung/sold the banana, you should get extra. Your idea is truly a creative reflection of the state of affairs here.
1
And so, Mr Farago, you have pressed the slacks, sewn on some nice buttons, and lovingly embroidered your initials on the lapel.
Won’t the Emperor be delighted!
5
I'm not here to read. I'm here to be me:
PEAR!
You're welcome. I soon expect a call from MoMa
9
@Jef McAllister It's actually spelt MoMA.
I think everyone has slipped on the peel.
7
Trickle down economics?
2
I always remember a late night on the uptown No. 1 train as I watched...puzzled.... as someone was cutting out panel of a empty subway ad slot.... it was a Keith Haring. I wonder where it is now, and how much the "theif" (?) would want for it.
2
Those of you criticizing the writer of this opinion piece have fallen for another object of subversively satirical performance art. By taking a contrarian stand so completely at odds with any semblance of rationality or taste, the writer/artist has managed to cobble some notoriety by piggybacking a few column inches onto the banana with the duct tape. (The duct tape must be double-sided.) True, the big bucks art world is populated by a class of status seekers with more money than brains and more impressed by dollar signs than anything of true aesthetic value, but now the joke is on the rest of us. Well played, Mr. Farago.
4
When you peel back the layers of metaphor, art is just a slippery slope, and you never know what a foolish monkey of an art critic will uncritically endorse. It's curious George.
6
Art is something that is created which holds meaning. In this case, Comedian has done that as well as elicited emotions and reactions from many, which enhances its artistic statement.
1
I ran this article by a number of well known NYC critics and aesthetes. They were almost unanimous in their praise, and demanded to be allowed to experience this type of art on a daily basis. So, I’ve left voicemails at all local fruit distributors, ordering a carton of bananas to be delivered to the Great Ape House at the Bronx Zoo every day.
21
Contemporary art is a way for billionaires to launder money and artists to trade on their brands and little else.
23
@Hank Don't recall seeing any ads, billboards or commercials anywhere for Cattelan's "brand". Can you provide some examples?
I taped a red pepper to the wall in front of me, then I took a walk. When I got home, the weight of the red pepper had yanked the tape off the wall and it fell to the floor. Now all I have left are two marks where it was because it also tore the paint off the wall. I guess being a true artist is knowing how much tape to use when creating fine art.
40
If you call it "The Impermanence of Culture" it will be worth 240k and an article in the Times
12
@Michael Kennedy
Haha!
1
@Doug Thanks. In a way, I'm glad it fell. I wouldn't want to get sued for plagiarism.
2
Regardless of individual tastes, art should make you feel something. There should be a visceral reaction when you see it.
It sounds like this piece succeeded.
8
It is all about the upper class.
5
So little over so little. Ugh. Why is beauty so hated and avoided.
8
My first thought on seeing this took me right back to Warhol's 1967 album cover for Velvet Underground and Nico. On the original copies the banana was peeled away, like duct tape.
10
Yes, you’re right, the Emperor’s are absolutely gorgeous. Thanks for describing why at such great length.
6
Love how this generates intense debate. In my eyes, this was a genial act of the artist - in continuity with previous works of his (many mentioned in the article).
Who’s paying for it is an other question for sure...
1
I have no problem with the artist. He was trying to make the art collectors and critics look like idiots and he has succeeded. The sucker who paid $120000 and this article are proof.
77
@Onomayo
Hmmm - actually, bought because the artist (and others) wanted to bring attention to Art Basel having done so much, and ready to share itself with the larger world ready to appreciate it.
1
@Onomayo
Whoever paid $120K really doesn't care; maybe they're in on the joke, maybe they're not, but it was just chump change to them anyway. An afternoon well spent.
2
@Onomayo
I have a problem with the artist if he keeps the $120,000.
1
All this tells me is there are people with too much money. Is this the third or fourth article about this? C’mon. I pay for access to this paper and still get ads. Enough already.
22
Eh, I think you just wish Banksy wasn’t culturally relevant.
14
Do I mind if a artist decides to have fun and produce a joke. No. Do i have a problem with anyone writing more then a line about it or call it art. Yes. The first time I saw a mounted fish on the wall, pushed the button and watched it's head and tail twitch and heard it sing I giggled. I wouldn't buy one and hang it on my wall but for a moment it made me laugh so I viewed it as harmless. But if someone wrote a story about it and called it art I would be disturbed. Because in no stretch of anyone's imagination could it be considered art. Banana and duct tape is no different.
30
@KJ Peters "It is Art because the Artist says it's Art." Sort of a "cogito ergo sum" thing.... LOL..
1
@KJ Peters
Very different. A fish on a wall is - well, it’s art - but it’s a mass market product. A banana? Yes, also a product for the masses; except profoundly elevated. It was, for a brief moment and fleetingly so, available only to a few.
Think of the agony one must go through before spending $120,000.00 on a banana.
“Shall I feed starving children, remove land mines, and improve sanitation around the world? Oh, you know what? Look, a banana.”
Oh, so much to say, so few bananas.
4
@Daniel Kauffman
How could one turn fish on the wall into art. Have a art critic say it's a wry commentary on the need of people to give animals human qualities while at the same time killing them for food. A stunning condemnation of meat eaters who want their animals to share their equal worth while at the same time slaughtering them to satisfy their lust for eating flesh. Of course it would have to go on for at least a thousand more words because to attempt such a absurd task you really have to lay it on thick.
1
You are wrong, Mr. Farago. The moment I read your phrase "taped-up pineapple," my nervous system quickened at one with my aesthetic sensibilities. Obviously that would be so much more pregnant with real and fake meaning! A big, pregnant, thorny fruit! Eek!
2
Some people can’t afford to buy one to eat and others are willing to more $100k to stick it to a wall with duct tape.
This is how we know we have a serious inequality problem.
79
@M
I’m sorry, were you going to eat that banana? Here, have mine. I’m going to open an art gallery filled with bananas. I hear you can get rich on them these days. I might even title my first piece in honor of your observation. I will call it “These two bananas are not the same ”
5
"implicate himself within the economic, social and discursive systems" - the writer, taped to a wall, might fetch more than 120K
5
There are a couple of sentiments that apply here: “I know it when I see it” and “I know what I like.” No, a banana taped to a wall with duct tape sure as heck isn’t art and no one in his or her right mind would like it. Paying more than a hundred thousand for such ‘art’ is the very definition of decadence.
205
@Bookworm8571
Yes, but less than $100,000? A steal!!
8
@Bookworm8571
Maybe a buck. Haha.
3
@Bookworm8571 its conceptual value adds to the argument that some of Sotherby's outlandish prices does not put a dime in the pocket of the artist
1
perhaps we are trying too hard to create, and, conversely, to appreciate. When it takes this much print about a banana taped to a wall, it causes me to wonder about the state of the human condition. four centuries of musicians composing. then, someone deconstructs music and takes apart instruments in a concept moment. to what purpose? someone designs buildings which whirl round or hang out into space, but much space is wasted. are we to accept that the best has been achieved and what is left is to go backward? striving after the new or the quirky can cause a sprain in the muscle. relax and enjoy a meteor shower. it's free, frequent and does not require reams of writing.
2
But this silliness has been done. See Duchamp’s urinal over a century ago (1917)
14
It's like there's a switch that can't be turned off: someone duct tapes a banana to a wall and you *can't resist* taking it seriously. You can't just say: oh, that's silly. You have to take it deadly serious.
I wonder if critics do this because they want to be part of the performance? As other people pointed out, if the banana cost 75 cents, no one would care. Well, if critics didn't dissect the banana's meaning, who would we laugh at? We need these serious essays about the banana in order for the piece to work.
And by contributing to the work, art critics get to feel like artists themselves.
9
Yellow journalism! A rotten story!!
Despite the absurdity, whoever purchased that work of art will surely be able to sell it for much more than they paid.
2
@Jeff Prove it!
This is just the urinal over again, except it’s not a urinal this time, it’s a banana. And it’s not about anything in particular, it can’t be, it’s a banana with duct tape.
5
@John Moniker: I can't help myself: sometimes a banana is just a banana... (sorry).
4
I may be mistaken but I believe I just saw this phenomenal installation at Trader Joe’s today.
322
Must be a traveling exhibition then, as I saw it at the local Safeway.
47
@Karen Ladd
And I slipped on it on my way to visit my attorney.
Oy gevalt, the ignominy of it all.
22
That’s gives me an idea...
4
There was an advertisement not long ago, in which an artist was explaining his work: an empty canvas, to his friend. It went something like:
“What I was trying to do here was capture the emptiness of modern life. There are no colors. There is no representation. The canvas is blank.”
To which his friend replies: “You ran out of money for paint again, didn’t you?”
.
I bring this up here because at some level I wonder if ANYTHING can be art, as long as the artist or a critic can explain it in a lofty way - as Jason Farago has here. And I question if that’s really such a good thing. What about the canon? What about technique? What about color and proportion? If I was to take a messy drawing my seven year old son did, and attribute to it a long theoretical diatribe - would it become art worthy of a museum?
27
@ZAW To answer your last question, no. And like someone else commented, this work by Cattelan is not a masterpiece so probably not worthy of a museum but perfect for Miami Basel. It’s meant to be funny and it is. Furthermore any museum curator would have a hard time convincing an acquisitions committee that buying this work of art would not spark public protests and calls for their removal. I wonder if people would feel any differently if a collector who bought one (because it’s an edition of 5) donated it to a museum.
And you wonder why Trump was elected? Get a clue.
52
huh? those Florida rich people most assuredly are right wing Republicans very happy to spend their Trump tax savings buying back stock and buying $120,000 bananas
4
When Duchamp exhibited that urinal in 1917, he was making an innovative, provocative statement on the nature of art and the art world. Over a century later, the statement has been made and remade countless times, and there is nothing whatsoever provocative about it. Cattelan's banana is boring, unimaginative, and unfunny.
159
Yes, and I wish to add that even the original urinal, beyond being indeed at the time a new and provocative statement, was not Art.
8
@I.Keller - of course it was art. If an artists exhibits something in an art gallery, it's art. That's the point. You might not like it or value it, you might think it's worthless and stupid, and you might be right... but it's still art.
8
I liked the banana but not the urinal. But they are both the same pieces. Good point!
1
What is this called... "The Taped Banana?" Close enough.
2
Sometimes a banana is just a banana....
9
Almost everything Banks has ever done has more to say, more technical merit and more cultural impact. You were doing so well until you pointlessly decided to include a snide cheap shot at a better artist as part of your defence.
48
@Alex - Banksy is quite possibly the least talented artist to ever become famous. His technical merit, if you care about such things, is negligible. His wit is superficial (I would argue that almost everything he's ever done has LESS to say than this banana). Yes, he has had a lot of cultural impact, but then so has Maurizio Cattelan. This banana is having cultural impact right now.
Although the Kardashian family obviously have a lot more cultural impact than either of them.
1
Due to bad weather, my traveling installation of "Fruit Flies" was unable to make the gala.
50
He wanted to be ludicrous momentarily
but ended up being ludicrous exclusively
3
This article is far, far more interesting and articulate than Cattelan’s banana but I doubt Mr. Farago got paid $120,000 for it.
10
"As to why Mr. Cattelan’s banana has gripped the public imagination, it has something to do with its price — $120,000 to $150,000, in an edition of three and two artists’ proofs."
It has everything to do with price, and nothing else.
Without the outrageous price tag this isn't just old news, it's not just decrepit, it's long dead.
People were genuinely shocked over a century ago by a urinal being placed in a gallery because it was truly revolutionary and shocking. However, once the shock was done, it was done. Now the only thing that matters is how commoditization drives everything. If the sticker price wasn't exorbitant, if the banana taped to the wall had be priced at 79 cents, no one would have cared. They only cared because it was priced at 120,000 dollars and up.
You mention Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain" so you can wrongly assert that other artists urinated in it when they didn't. The original piece is from over a century ago, (1917), when neoclassical realism in both painting and sculpture held sway. Artists urinated in a "replica", not the original, starting in the 1990's.
For some actual perspective as to why Marcel Duchamp’s "Fountain" of 1917 was genuinely shocking, perhaps mention that it would be another 10 years before the first the first feature-length motion picture with synchronized recorded music score and speech would be released, and only 10 years before Duchamp, Henri Matisse and André Derain had been labelled "Wild Beats" for their painted portraits.
14
This is an excellent article: in addition to unpacking Cattelan's new sculpture, I am thankful for the way it helps me understand why I've never found Banksy's work interesting: he's a populist, through and through, with little more to say beyond one or two populist one-liners. And for Banksy, like populists in elected office, this juvenile pose masks a collaboration with power that doesn't try to trouble, change or reveal its terms.
4
Anyone who pays $120,000 for that is bananas.
35
@Matt - not really, they need somewhere to dump their capital where it won't be taxed and given the banana artwork's notoriety it's bound to increase in value.
The high end art market is a scam and the banana is just making the scam explicit.
1
@Matt I understand the humor in this comment.
So if the buyer used a .29 cent banana from Kroeger to replace the one destroyed does the new banana suddenly become worth $120,000?
10
@Steve it would be $120,000.29
14
You have used valuable media bandwidth trying to prove that the class clown is really the star pupil. I'm sorry. No.
51
I am not sure who assigned Mr. Farago this fool's errand - there have been whole books written about Defending the Undefendable....
and they were not wholly successful either.
8
The critic could also point out the broader historical context of Art Basel Miami. In the past groups of bananas have been displayed. As well as works mocking banana republics.
The don’t like saying the Comedian is art. However, the mere fact that the work started a discussion and inspired a performance artist to consume it speaks to something the work has done to touch us. I must concede that it’s just as much art as someone who might collect sticks and display them or stack rocks.
5
@Alex Or perhaps place a shark in formaldehyde
5
this article has so many words that really say nothing.
57
@michael
And we merry readers adorn it more with words of our own.
The rich continue to laugh at the middle class and poor. While they enjoy tax breaks, 700,000 of the poorest will lose food stamps this month. There will be an ugly reckoning some day soon.
66
Perhaps Mr. Cattelan is simply putting his own twist on the age old question: who or what determines whether a duct taped banana or the Mona Lisa should hang on a wall? Perhaps an appropriate response to "Comedian" is to duct tape the Mona Lisa to the wall and rename her "Tragedienne", a response to those who think it's time to take her down, as Mr. Farago suggested last month.
4
Mr. Farago—
Why (albeit “grudgingly”) dress this puerile foolishness up with a pretentious lecture-review.
30
I cannot wait to see what the Gorilla Girls do with this. I thought they had cornered the market on banana art by now.
1
@JNR2 Oops . . . that's Guerilla Girls . . .
1
This brings to mind a story of an elderly couple in Manhattan that were very rich. Over the years they amassed a huge collection of fine art from around the word. One piece they spent a lot of money on was a two inch piece of rope with a nail through it on the wall. Asked what made it so special they replied that the artist was the first to do it. At least that didn't have to be replaced every week.
6
@Bob And they donated all of their collection to the National Gallery of Art, including the nail and the string.
1
I have to grudgingly applaud the ability of this work to underscore and focus our awareness on the superficiality, rabid consumerism, colossal level of wealth inequality, and superficial vapidity of a large part of our culture and society. The accompanying photo speaks volumes: a crowd of thrilled and frenzied smartphone-faced economically comfortable people photographing a banana, because it's what everyone else is doing and it's, for the moment, the cool and exciting thing.
89
@Dominic You, I believe, unlike most commenters, get the point of this. I'd like to ask most readers of this article-ever cross your mind that Cattelan is thumbing his nose at a certain segment of the population that flock to this? Do you think he may have set up a bear trap for the fashonistas/Instagrammers with their hunger for and association with the Next Big Thing/Trendy Art Topic? How he's mocking them when they frame their self-portraits with, what, duct tape and a banana? Get the joke? He's secretly hoping the trust fund spawn that capture a digital record of their being there and later share with the social media world really don't. As far as the Duchamp analogy- not everyone gets his original statement apparently, and that maybe it should be revisited every so often.
17
@Dino C. No. I think he just realized he can get their money with no effort on his part at this point. He is lucky enough to be part of the 0.1 percent of artists that are famous,Which means even when he does nothing, it has value.
4
Even if this were social commentary, that does not make it art.
There is social commentary in the opinion articles of the Times. That does not make them art.
Even if this was social commentary, then it is nothing more than social commentary and a fresh banana, but definitely not art.
13
Bananas are going extinct, that bannana might be worth a lot more one day
4
If he had used dual lock velcro instead of duct tape the banana might have had a longer shelf life. Maybe for the other two?
4
Mr. Farago should read Robert Hughes’s essay from the 1980’s, “Art and Money,” to gain some very thoughtful historical perspective on this issue. Then follow up that by reading everything else Hughes wrote about art, for a deep education on the moral and cultural ethos embodied in a wide range of works of art. On reflection Mr. Farago might decide his defense of the banana/tape piece is sorely lacking in sense, hieratic or common. Not to mention that of the buyers or the ethical motives of the hustler-dealer.
7
@Sheldan Collins
Telling a critic to go read an essay is a bit presumptive.
Do you mean presumptuous?
1
Has all the ( tired) shock value of a Trump lie.
15
As Freud could have said, sometimes a banana is just a banana. It ain’t art and the fact that some fool with more money than taste paid $120,000 for it proves that Barnum was right.
181
@Avatar I agree no fool like a rich fool.
6
@Avatar But wait, there's more! Act now and you can have, not one, not two, not even three or four, but as many as six inches of duct tape. And believe it or not, this duct tape has been torn by the artist, not cut with a pair of scissors as you might suspect is the method lesser artists use to tape their fruit to walls! Call now! This offer won't last!
7
@Avatar I'm willing to bet that there may or may not have been some money laundering behind this banana.
1
I would now like to offer for sale my newest work of contemporary dance, titled "Standing on One Leg for Three Minutes."
You may purchase the concept for $120,000 (or best offer); you will need to provide your own leg and, of course, your own floor.
25
@Bob K
Cut the leg, staple it on a wall, and I'm sure the elite will stand in awe.
4
Are we sure Phoebe Waller-Bridge didn't write this as potentially the opening episode of Season 3 for Fleabag? I can just hear Olivia Coleman's character giving this speech.
7
Banana on a Wall is the Donald Trump of the art world.
5
@MJM
I'm not sure Donald Trump is worth that much.
11
To paraphrase Freud:
"Sometimes a banana is just a banana."
1
@Dave
And to paraphrase René Magritte,
"This is not a pipe."
Even though, according to a well known hoax, you can smoke a banana to get high: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bananadine
1
@Dave I think that is what the artist had in mind.
It's a $120k art world meme... and nothing more.
3
I know the art world. I ran a successful contemporary art gallery and was editor of an international art magazine. Cattelan’s banana is rubbish, and it’s sad to see the Times critic engaged in rhetorical backflips to try convince a rightly suspicious public that their instincts are wrong. You don’t need an art education to realize that telling the public they should recognize a banana and duct tape as worthy art is little more than gaslighting by art world elites.
414
@Paul Thank you. You got to the heart of the matter: a usually sincere and top-quality newspaper allowing a journalist to feed off of this cynical piece of rubbish by adding some utterly vain and ultimately completely puerile 'art-citical' intellectualizing.
5
Yet another famous white man does something dumb, and the world praises his achievement and throws money at him. Meanwhile, actual artists struggle to make a living. The struggling artist camp includes, of course, many not-famous white men, but also many others who often have to struggle even harder. Why not give some of them a chance instead?
34
I found this article witty and enlighting. Thank you Jason
5
this country has gone bananas
7
The definition of art today seems to be anything someone feels the need to express in some way. No matter how ridiculous, repulsive, ugly, absurd or brain dead.
That of course doesn't mean it is actually considered "art" by most people. But obviously to each their own.
In this case, spending $120k for a banana and a piece of duct tape seems absurd beyond belief.
And this critic seems to have twisted himself into a pretzel to validate what a masterpiece of art it is, or at least what a master the artist is. It's clearly right up their with the painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
Whatever your cup of tea is, just proclaim it's art. What drivel.
15
Much ado about nothing. Sorry I wasted my time reading this.
15
The planet is burning up, meanwhile people in private jets, fly to Miami to party and play and to be seen with a banana, duct taped to a wall. All that human energy, focus and money dedicated to pretense, superficiality and conceit. It wouldn’t be so bad if we had a stable democracy and a forgiving environment. But we don’t. The cognitive dissonance set up by the very real and frightening NYT stories of environmental catastrophe juxtaposed with this incredible human folly induces not emotions related to viewing artistic beauty, but nausea. All the blathering in this review is just personal job justification. I miss Tom Wolfe, he would have made us laugh as he tore the entire South Beach scene to shreds.
346
@Eric Blair
And Robert Hughes
6
@Eric Blair
Your summary was Cattelan's purpose. The planet is burning up. 3 million children die every year of malnutrition, and people will fly to Miami in order to buy a banana for $120,000.
The artistic statement is powerful. The nausea you feel is the desired effect.
5
This story is a simple illustration of the gross wealth inequity in America today.
Tax the rich too, dangit!!
69
Peel slowly and see.
Ha-ha, the joke's on all of us who trade in the Cultural Currency of the Moment (I plead guilty). I suppose another attempt at artistic showmanship is relatively harmless, but it's too bad all that public relations effort - not to mention the $120,000 - couldn't have used "The Banana" to highlight the worldwide problems of nutritional deficiencies and food shortages.
5
I find this all foolish, and yet, somehow, I never once considered the possibility that I am a hopeless philistine.
11
There can be no defense of this mockery. I am a struggling artist, spending hours and hours to develop my craft and, this jerk puts up a banana on the wall and selling it for $1,200. Shame on those try to find a deeper meaning behind an affixed fruit.
76
@Sam Diego not $1,200. He sold it for $120,000.
13
The world waits for you to produce your masterpiece. Whatcha got that’s more valuable than a banana and duct tape?
9
Just wanted to add... You might consider that Cattelan very likely would agree with you. Hence the banana and duct tape.
10
Simple explanation.
Some monkeys have lots of money.
95
@Alan Dean Foster
No better case for taxing the 1% at a higher rate.
26
@eddie p why not tax museums then? Oh, wait, it's OK for institutions to take donations from rich people to buy art? How about universities with their rare book collections. Perhaps Warren can tax their wealth?
2
In a bizarre article of whataboutism, the author calls Banksy, arguably the most impactful artist in a generation, a fraud and socially irrelevant, and a man who duct tapes a banana on the wall an artist. It’s hard to imagine a history book referencing this banana escapade, indeed it’s hard to imagine us remembering it even two weeks time. I doubt it caused many onlookers to reflect on their own world or observe a reflection on the world outside. On the contrary, Banksy’s murals offer poignant commentary and empathy for his subjects, and given the wide-spread awareness of the work it seems intellectually bankrupt to claim irrelevance.
It seems to me that our author is an art insider and actively propagates the institution embodied by the suspended banana that us philistine masses so dearly scorn. Thus, instead of reevaluating if the institutional insiders have perhaps lost sight of what most humans consider to be art, the author denigrates an artist of the people whose canvas is our world rather than walls of preordained zoning. The world of art has stubbornly remained an oligarchy in a society that despises being talked down upon. Only too fitting that this display could be ended by the narcissism of selfies.
226
@Tyler Benster
Banksy is the Thomas Kinkade of the casually hip - the subtlety of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the popularity as well.
35
He’s certainly no banana.
6
@Tyler Benster - Banksy is a newspaper cartoonist posing as avant-garde.
3
Another thought provoking and oddly appealing epistemological construct by this artist.
wow, i guess i do have some artistic talent .
35
Dare you to reveal your talent. It’s amazing this still is a response to art. It’s also kind of humorous in itself.
3
Mr. Farago must have endured sleepless nights when informed that he is to produce a defense of the $120,000 banana. How to spin a full-length article pretending this is not a testament to the arrant idiocy of the art world? Will the readers not recognize this as an insult to the intelligence of all mankind?
I applaud Mr. Farago for his effort.
18
Comedian ? No, scam Artist. With an emphasis on Scam.
Congratulations.
12
As a professional artist who spends many hours on each carefully crafted painting, I am both impressed and saddened to find someone can duct tape a banana to a wall and find themselves inundated by six figure offers. Why have I wasted my time selling elaborately detailed paintings for a couple thousand bucks each when wealthy suckers will line up for a taped banana?
Come to think of it, why did Michelangelo spend all that time on the Sistine Chapel ceiling? Maybe he should have just nailed an apple up there, invited some live ones in to view it and called it a day. As far as I can tell, Michelangelo and I worked way too hard for much too little.
491
@Bill Kowalski link your work. Let's see how good it is
9
@Spyder
with all due respect, Spyder, that's not the point.
70
@Bill Kowalski I own a page of an illuminated manuscript from the 16th century. Looking at the art of an unknown monk who turned to dust centuries ago makes me ponder and rejoice in our common humanity. Looking at your work might incite similar feelings. Feelings I have never experienced in the produce department....
87
If Aliens want to understand humans, the taped banana is probably as good as any other. "Hmm, yes, they are fiction creators. Attaching symbolic confabulations to everything they see or hear." It would probably be a lot closer to the truth than sending them a radio transmission of the so-called 'best' of humanity.
4
If the purpose of art is to evoke an emotion, surely the comment thread of this article shows this artwork to be a great success.
3
@Laura s
I’ve seen that defence before. If it’s true then surely Donald Trump is the worlds greatest artist and his twitter account the worlds greatest work of art.
9
Some people buy art not because they like or admire it but because they know it will spark conversation. In this case, if someone I knew bought The Banana for $120k and showed it off at a party, the conversation on the way home would be “how can we help our friend get the help he (or she) so clearly needs?”
30
@Mary McCue
Clearly, the reason the collectors purchased this fabulous work is because of Mr. Cattelan's status as a blue chip artist.
Much like women who spend thousands of dollars on a must-have handbag. To many, they are mentally off-kilter. To others, the epitome of the in-the-know it-girl.
3
@Mary McCue Also, we can all make our own so easily at home for mere pennies and show off at our own parties.
5
The fact that anyone entertains the ridiculous notion that this is an artistic expression is proof enough that most of the art world is just a bunch of pompous, elitist, imbeciles.
392
@Errol I agree with everything but the word "most". This is the 1% of the art world (or .1%). MOST of the art world thinks this is nonsense too.
16
@jray
I hope you are correct.
2
@Errol I am. I'm an artist and art professor. My experience of the art world regularly ranges from local student art shows to international biennials. The vast majority of artists are making next to no money and working earnestly to address the pressing issues of our time. This critic wasted his time and platform on this banana.
14
Sure, it can be art. That it’s been priced that high? Objectively preposterous.
12
How ridiculous!
9
I don't really like the taste of banana's.
The only way to treat such idiocy: Ignore it.
NYTimes: Next time this sort of garbage (I'm being polite with that noun) is created, please DON'T tell us all about it.
127
Anyone who spends a second of their life in a museum admiring this garbage deserves to have it deducted from their time on earth.
What utter stupidity.
The glitterati have no taste.
130
The art world is one big bubble and a prank such as this exposes the truth that the emperor has no clothes. We are used to bubbles in Stock Markets and in Real Estate which have the potential to bankrupt entire countries, but bubbles in obscure corners like art, misprinted postage stamps, taxi medallions, comic books, antiques, classic cars, trading stamps etc. are just as common, but they do not affect the public in general and the victims are fewer and richer, tend to keep quiet and are quickly forgotten. To get going, the bubble needs a commodity which is unique and in short supply, a work of art by a dead artist fills the bill perfectly as he is no longer in the world to create more of the same, no matter, thousands may be capable of duplicating his works. There has to be a class of poseur experts who vouch for the authenticity and value, which only goes up as does their cut and commission for all the pumping. The scene is now set for the herd to jump in and start bidding up the price. Diamond was just a stone until the DeBeers company learnt to control the supply and associate it with engagements and marriages. If the Dutch can lose their fortunes on Tulips, why not Bananas? Maurizio Cattelan has made his intellectual cousin, Charles Ponzi proud indeed.
23
@Rahul Perfectly summed up commentary.
If you think "Comedian" is a work of art worth $120K, I have a whole bunch of bananas available for sale. Along with my share of that bridge in Brooklyn...
4
Strange to have a go at Banksy like that. He’s not my cup of tea but what exactly is it you don’t like about him, that he’s popular or that he actually uses paint and draws? Sometimes a banana is just a banana.
109
@David
I appreciate Banksy.
I do not appreciate the fool who paid for this prank.
And I do hope the artist meant it as a prank to expose the∂ absurd pretentiousness of the 1%ers who would pay.
If in the end the artist acknowledges this was a social commentary on wealth inequality, then...bravo.
14
Anybody else see the “Documentary Now!” episode with Cate Blanchett as the performance artist? It seems like the Fred Armisen character might be based on this guy.
3
if u say so...
6
Oh, I get it. It's a masterpiece because an "artist" did it.
50
@Dave A white male artist of course
1
@Dave - nobody said it was a masterpiece. It sold for $120,000 because it was made by a famous artist, that's all. Kylie Jenner gets paid $1 million to send a tweet, so why not?
3
You used a reference to the “emperor’s new clothes!” Quite so! My first thought after reading the original article was, “There’s a sucker born every minute!”
7
"His entire career has been a testament to an impossible desire to create art sincerely, stunted here by money, there by his own doubts." If that's the case, then maybe it's time for him to throw in the towel. Or at least tape it to the wall.
52
He can’t be hurting that much for money if someone just paid 120k for the Banana.
2
Nope. The banana is not a sculpture. The oh so earnest art critic, on the other hand, comes close to being a comedian.
294
it's plagiarized from velvet underground and nico
45
My thoughts exactly
@Chris Yes, Andy Warhol did this image and did it far better with his peelable banana on the cover of the VU album. And unlike the Basel banana, his image has endured on an album widely recognized as one of the most influential in the history of rock music.
2
Rich people need more hobbies.
140
@pamela Exactly. For starters, they could spend their money and time on something useful, like eradicating hunger and disease around the world, instead of engaging in conspicuous consumption.
It must be a pathetic life indeed, to go look at a duct taped banana for entertainment.
2
Seriously?
13