Art Theory

September 19, 1993: Morley Safer's infamous 1993 art story



60 Minutes

Morley questions Jeff Koons, Jeffrey Deitch, and Hilton Kramer about contemporary art and whether it means anything at all.

Source

Similar Posts

33 thoughts on “September 19, 1993: Morley Safer's infamous 1993 art story
  1. How do people with a spare $170,000 to blow on a piece of "art" make the $170,000 in the first place? Well, they surely are economically talented individuals aren't they! Let's give them a tax break so they can buy 3 urinals. Trickle down economics … literally.

  2. ,Art speak like political speak is the uttering of nonsensical stagnation. In retrospect, it's little wonder that I fell asleep in art history.

  3. I admittedly don’t understand some modern works of art, but this segment didn’t do justice to the “candy” installation, which consists of a pile of candies weighing approximately 175lb, representing the weight of the artist’s partner (who succumbed to AIDS in the 1980s) when he was healthy. So, when people take away a piece of candy, it represents the decimation of the disease on the human body as it withers to nothing.

  4. I really regret throwing away the tarps we laid down during painting last year. we had black tarp to catch the white wall paint and the blue trim. It was full of little drips and smears, probably worth half a million pounds.

  5. This is just more proof that theirs a lot of people "with more money than brains". I can think of a lot better art, and a lot better ways to spend the insane amounts of money. Thanks.

  6. The problem is because wealthy and connected collectors buy these works, the artists ends up being considered “important” and we, the general public end up having their art shoved down our throats at museums, public spaces, popular culture, media and the such. Then you’ve got people thinking that because it’s so expensive it must be good.

  7. This is relentless! OMG, I promise I am giving this as an audible story to my middle school 7th/8th grade art education students. They really do not like to read. Maybe because some cannot read, some can read but cannot comprehend, while others just do not care. As a teacher we are constantly hounded on teaching in various styles or techniques. So, I give full articles at times, I give audibles at other times, I read the story aloud, or I supply a visual audible/video as this one here. In either case it shows I am flexible and trying my best to accomodate all learners and students with IEP's. Nonetheless, I want my art education students to know reading, comprehending, critically thinking as well as interpreting the meaning behind the material is important. I will not let them go without reading and writing in art. My art class encompasses all things in art. PERIOD!

  8. I guess Morley was wrong… some of this stuff IS aging well. A Jean-Michel Basquiat painting similar to the one at 9:49 in this story sold at auction in 2017 for $110 million.

  9. Pretentious bs. Urinals or a blank paper as art? No. People really do buy anything with a name attached to it thinking they know something no one else is privy to. They want to prove their money can buy class, when it is buying rubbish.

  10. Art is in the eyes of the beholder. There are a lot of simpletons out there that do no SEE that it is art. It shows ones lack of exposure to modern art can cripple your mind and expose your ignorance.

  11. what happens when a bunch of illiterate salespeople got a bunch of money for bullshitting trying to "express themselves through art"

  12. This Safer rant is so tired but people still love it. And repeat it.

    The super-rich float around the world in luxury mega-yachts followed by huge ships full of their toys (the toys, which include cars, helicopters, and submarines would be tacky to keep on their luxury mega-yachts) and the average American adult spends about 2000 hours a year watching TV and other video.

    Why is it only the dollars and time spent on modern art that raises such ire or is described as coming at the expense of the poor?

    Most modern artists do art because they are driven to do it, and they fall far short of making a living. The wealthy bidding on art at Sotheby's are there because they love the art OR they want to demonstrate their wealth to other rich people by spending incredible sums on something that has no obvious function. None of this is new or unique to modern art. Tax the rich properly and the prices will come down to earth.

    Do I begrudge the handful of artists who make a good living? Are they creating less value than a similarly compensated pop star, sports hero, or stock broker? Like the pop star and sports hero they have somehow distinguished themselves from hordes of others who have aspired to succeed in their field.

    (No matter how you got rich, by luck, smarts, or inheritance, your tax rate is too low.)

    https://www.businessinsider.com/luxury-yacht-garcon-support-photos-2014-2

    https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/31/u-s-adults-now-spend-nearly-6-hours-per-day-watching-video/

  13. 60 Minutes is great !!
    **I was in my 20's when this story first aired and I simply shook my head & rolled my eyes. I'm in my 50's now though, and still havent changed my opinion !!

  14. Basquiat was a genius not only for his appeal to the intellectual but for his simplistic and direct approach to language and technique. The symbolism of placing vague crowns next to the written names of heroic figures in black culture is something anyone can grasp.

  15. This pre-dates the Young British Artists (YBAs) who took the art world by storm in the mid-1990s – and made Damien Hirst the wealthiest fine artist in the world.

Comments are closed.

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com