Comments on: Picasso Gets the Chop !! – artmarketblog.com http://www.artmarketblog.com/2008/04/17/picasso-gets-the-chop-artmarketblogcom/ Art Market Analysis by Nic Forrest Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:54:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Toby Blyth http://www.artmarketblog.com/2008/04/17/picasso-gets-the-chop-artmarketblogcom/#comment-1199 Toby Blyth Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:58:13 +0000 http://artforprofits.wordpress.com/?p=474#comment-1199 Australia did not have moral rights legislation then. It does now. Australia did not have moral rights legislation then. It does now.

]]> By: artforprofits http://www.artmarketblog.com/2008/04/17/picasso-gets-the-chop-artmarketblogcom/#comment-1198 artforprofits Tue, 22 Apr 2008 23:19:09 +0000 http://artforprofits.wordpress.com/?p=474#comment-1198 Hi Tony, The moral rights of Australian creators are actually protected under the Copyright Act so there is some protection for artist's integrity Nicholas Forrest artmarketblog.com Hi Tony,

The moral rights of Australian creators are actually protected under the Copyright Act so there is some protection for artist’s integrity

Nicholas Forrest
artmarketblog.com

]]> By: Toby Blyth http://www.artmarketblog.com/2008/04/17/picasso-gets-the-chop-artmarketblogcom/#comment-1197 Toby Blyth Mon, 21 Apr 2008 07:33:15 +0000 http://artforprofits.wordpress.com/?p=474#comment-1197 Technically Australia had no moral rights legislation then of course...and Picasso produced so much guff on paper he might have laughed at the idea. He was crassly commercial well before Warhol! Technically Australia had no moral rights legislation then of course…and Picasso produced so much guff on paper he might have laughed at the idea. He was crassly commercial well before Warhol!

]]> By: Artist on the waterways http://www.artmarketblog.com/2008/04/17/picasso-gets-the-chop-artmarketblogcom/#comment-1196 Artist on the waterways Sun, 20 Apr 2008 13:13:36 +0000 http://artforprofits.wordpress.com/?p=474#comment-1196 Hi Nick Although I think that Piccasso would not have cared one bit what they did with his modern art pics as he thought that most art critics were unappreciative of pure fine art, of which he was well capable of producing and would have produced more if there was a sustainable living to be made from it. So he produced "crap" as he put it as that is what they wanted and it sold! I only liked one modern one of his and that was man with guitar as I am a puzzle and crossword fan. Hi Nick

Although I think that Piccasso would not have cared one bit what they did with his modern art pics as he thought that most art critics were unappreciative of pure fine art, of which he was well capable of producing and would have produced more if there was a sustainable living to be made from it. So he produced “crap” as he put it as that is what they wanted and it sold! I only liked one modern one of his and that was man with guitar as I am a puzzle and crossword fan.

]]> By: hugh thomas http://www.artmarketblog.com/2008/04/17/picasso-gets-the-chop-artmarketblogcom/#comment-1195 hugh thomas Sun, 20 Apr 2008 10:29:17 +0000 http://artforprofits.wordpress.com/?p=474#comment-1195 Just like to say that in general like your blog/info. Wish you all the best. Regards, Hugh Thomas Just like to say that in general like your blog/info.
Wish you all the best.
Regards, Hugh Thomas

]]> By: Ming http://www.artmarketblog.com/2008/04/17/picasso-gets-the-chop-artmarketblogcom/#comment-1194 Ming Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:31:12 +0000 http://artforprofits.wordpress.com/?p=474#comment-1194 I wonder if lets say someone boug Hockney's latest paintng, which is already in pieces and sold of individual pieces..what there be the same arguemunt. I wonder if lets say someone boug Hockney’s latest paintng, which is already in pieces and sold of individual pieces..what there be the same arguemunt.

]]> By: madsilence http://www.artmarketblog.com/2008/04/17/picasso-gets-the-chop-artmarketblogcom/#comment-1193 madsilence Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:52:57 +0000 http://artforprofits.wordpress.com/?p=474#comment-1193 Nicholas, an interesting story, and one I’d not heard before. Picasso himself may have appreciated this approach to making money from art. After all the artist was a great self-promoter and salesman. Would Picasso have produced multiple copies of the print? Of course that shouldn’t excuse the destruction of cultural products: I cringe whenever I read of an artist who cuts up books while creating art. The contemporary art world is built on money and profit, or so Andy Warhol would have us believe. As for “copyright law prevents derogatory treatment of an artwork…” I’m not familiar with this legal restriction. What does it mean? Doesn’t the legal owner have the right to dispose of the object in any way he sees fit? Thought-provoking material. MadSilence Nicholas, an interesting story, and one I’d not heard before. Picasso himself may have appreciated this approach to making money from art. After all the artist was a great self-promoter and salesman. Would Picasso have produced multiple copies of the print? Of course that shouldn’t excuse the destruction of cultural products: I cringe whenever I read of an artist who cuts up books while creating art. The contemporary art world is built on money and profit, or so Andy Warhol would have us believe. As for “copyright law prevents derogatory treatment of an artwork…” I’m not familiar with this legal restriction. What does it mean? Doesn’t the legal owner have the right to dispose of the object in any way he sees fit? Thought-provoking material.

MadSilence

]]>