HOLY GRAIL!

T.L.E. Sharp said:
You're not paying for a knife there. Sure, it happens to be a knife, but it could just as easily be a watch, a decorative egg, etc. It's a piece of art and a work of fine craftsmanship.

I get the price, but I don't get the purchase. Probably because I don't have that kind of money to throw around.
Click to expand...

I studied at the Art Institute of Chicago & Art Students League in NYC. IMO that is no more a piece of art then the various shinny items offered on QVC. The design is all over the place & borrows images (like the bears) from other original works. I suppose (if you were generous) you could make the case, that it is bad art and while I wouldn't agree, I'd decline to argue. MOMA has collection of everyday objects from an ice cream scoop to a target pistol that have transcended their function to become a piece of art. In short they have crossed the line from mere craft to art. If they were offered this knife for their collection, I think they'd laugh.
 
Seems like most of the 75 grand seems to be in the handles.i don't see 75k in them, ive seen exoticly engraved rifles,drillings, and shotguns with much nicer subject matter engraved for way less.
 
Feel free to flame me, but i think knives with that much arty work on them look like those cheap harley davidson zippo type knives. Always felt like that about knives that are trying hard in the looks dept. To me something like an umnumzaan or demko looks more expensive. Just my opinion.
 
betover said:
I studied at the Art Institute of Chicago & Art Students League in NYC. IMO that is no more a piece of art then the various shinny items offered on QVC. The design is all over the place & borrows images (like the bears) from other original works. I suppose (if you were generous) you could make the case, that it is bad art and while I wouldn't agree, I'd decline to argue. MOMA has collection of everyday objects from an ice cream scoop to a target pistol that have transcended their function to become a piece of art. In short they have crossed the line from mere craft to art. If they were offered this knife for their collection, I think they'd laugh.
Click to expand...

a98781_worst-art_6-blue-canvas.jpg

This sold for 43.8 million dollars.

I'm not criticizing the piece. I quite like it. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of arguing about what is and isn't art and what a piece should retail for.

You may not like the knife, but it's still a work of art and fine craftsmanship. If you gave me the tools and materials that Saburov used I could create a hot mess(which might actually be more "artistic"), not a coherent piece like his.
 
T.L.E. Sharp said:
a98781_worst-art_6-blue-canvas.jpg

This sold for 43.8 million dollars.

I'm not criticizing the piece. I quite like it. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of arguing about what is and isn't art and what a piece should retail for.

You may not like the knife, but it's still a work of art and fine craftsmanship. If you gave me the tools and materials that Saburov used I could create a hot mess(which might actually be more "artistic"), not a coherent piece like his.
Click to expand...

I agree with you wholeheartedly people often say "Oh look at that crap, I could paint something better." but nobody ever tries/does. Art is totally subjective, yeah the Soup Can was extremely simple, the fact is, nobody did it before Warhol. Hence it became Art. Art is about creativity and not about technical expertise in my opinion, do the two sometimes overlap? Of course. But since there are so many different genres, you can make art by drawing stick figures and gluing together literal trash/waste. If one person considers your resulting piece art, it's art.
 
I should also point out that I don't like the knife either. I like simple and that thing's a mess.

This would be more my interest if considering an absurdly priced art knife:

7b1d7bbe5f2a1be74fe895c485c42695.jpg
 
Last edited:
The thing about Warhol's Soup can series was that they were ordinary, I had a kind of shock seeing it hanging on a Museum wall. It called into play the very question of what is art. Given that we've all seen it a thousand times, it not longer has that effect on most of us. Marcel Duchamp did the same thing when he exhibited a urinal. It was like getting hit with a metaphorical cream pie & for a moment made you question your values. It had an impact.
To the extent we are talking knives & art, I would consider the Loveless boot knife to be a work of art. It's simple, clean and flawless. There is nothing there that shouldn't be. BTW one of the knives in MOMA's permeant collection is an Opinel.

At any rate for those of you that view it as art, go ahead. I was going to make a snide remark about hanging it next to the dogs playing poker print, but I'm not going to go there. :)
 
I'd buy two, one for hard use and one for the safe. I'm joking of course.

Imagine if after using it a bit, it prematurely wears or shows signs of design flaws.
 
And what I would do with that...eh..hideous looking thing..knife is it, guess so, it looks like a folder..?
I'd not buy it for one dollar.

Maybe someone likes it, maybe...yeah, that's fine then.

But me, uh it looks like children toy, or just junk.
 
That's what gets me about "Art" . and the explanation for what makes it so valuable. This reasoning that it makes in impact or causes you to stop and think or something . then these self important types decide to put up a statue of a urinal or Jesus being urinated on and its instantly called a masterpiece or work of art because of the shock value. if that's all it takes to create "Art"
I can do up something right now Im thinking maybe Elmo in a strip club throwing bills and smoking a cigar.

Becoming a famous artist is akin to becoming a famous actor or winning the lottery. You do it for years in the hopes some rich douchebag likes something you made and pays you a huge amount for it and then has to run and tell all his rich douchebag friends how great the thing is he bought and how they should buy one too and they all run and buy one as well and so on and so on
and then they all sit around and pat eachother on the back because they are so deep and enlightened and have the ability to discover true masterpieces and artitstic geniuses.

Most of us know what true art is and what it takes to create it. The line on a blue background above is not "Art" . splotches of paint spattered on a canvas is not art . we all know it.

if someone spent 500 hours on that knife then they should get $75000 for it 500x100/hr labor . for $75000 I would rather go out buy some nice machinery and tools and learn how to do it myself !!!
 
ponykid said:
That's what gets me about "Art" . and the explanation for what makes it so valuable. This reasoning that it makes in impact or causes you to stop and think or something . then these self important types decide to put up a statue of a urinal or Jesus being urinated on and its instantly called a masterpiece or work of art because of the shock value. if that's all it takes to create "Art"
I can do up something right now Im thinking maybe Elmo in a strip club throwing bills and smoking a cigar.

Becoming a famous artist is akin to becoming a famous actor or winning the lottery. You do it for years in the hopes some rich douchebag likes something you made and pays you a huge amount for it and then has to run and tell all his rich douchebag friends how great the thing is he bought and how they should buy one too and they all run and buy one as well and so on and so on
and then they all sit around and pat eachother on the back because they are so deep and enlightened and have the ability to discover true masterpieces and artitstic geniuses.

Most of us know what true art is and what it takes to create it. The line on a blue background above is not "Art" . splotches of paint spattered on a canvas is not art . we all know it.

if someone spent 500 hours on that knife then they should get $75000 for it 500x100/hr labor . for $75000 I would rather go out buy some nice machinery and tools and learn how to do it myself !!!
Click to expand...

Art? Hard to define. Was Frank Frazetta an artist? For sure but to some his paintings were equally as bad as an Avant-garde like Piss Christ to the mainstream. Was Jackson Pollock an artist even though he just splotched paint around? Yes he was; you'd have a hard time defending that position that he wasn't at any venue.

Actual art isn't defined by who buys it or who likes it. That's a trap you don't want to fall into.

Is this knife art? Probably not; it's more like Kitsch. Will it sell? For sure, probably without too much hassle and probably not to a person with a hint of irony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top