If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSN)   Oh: artist uses old comics to create paper-mache superhero sculpture. D'oh: with a first edition "The Avengers" and other rare comics worth over $30,000   (now.msn.com) divider line 82
    More: Dumbass, papier mache  
•       •       •

8743 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Jul 2013 at 3:25 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



82 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-07 12:48:45 PM
"Dumbass"?

More like "Hero".

First off, the comics were already thrown away, so they were going to be destroyed, anyway.

Second, it's better to see an old, valuable comic like this actually used for something as opposed to sealed in mylar, or worse, locked in a slab of lucite so that it will never be touched by air or human hands again, but will retain its "collectible value".
 
2013-07-07 01:11:21 PM
So?
 
2013-07-07 01:45:12 PM

FirstNationalBastard: Second, it's better to see an old, valuable comic like this actually used for something as opposed to sealed in mylar, or worse, locked in a slab of lucite so that it will never be touched by air or human hands again, but will retain its "collectible value".



Wrong.

Do you think it would be totally cool if I used a Babe Ruth baseball card to light a cigar?
 
2013-07-07 01:53:11 PM

The_Sponge: FirstNationalBastard: Second, it's better to see an old, valuable comic like this actually used for something as opposed to sealed in mylar, or worse, locked in a slab of lucite so that it will never be touched by air or human hands again, but will retain its "collectible value".


Wrong.

Do you think it would be totally cool if I used a Babe Ruth baseball card to light a cigar?


Different things.

A baseball card is a collectable. It really has no purpose other than to sit there and look pretty.

A comic book was meant to be read (and tossed). And, at this point, if someone really wants to read the actual story, there are a dozen different ways to read it.

And, while I can see slabbing some older, rarer comics, jerkoffs are slabbing and marking up books that came out last week and will never be worth more than a quarter in our lifetimes, or our children's lifetimes.

Speculators and collectors ruined comic books, so yeah, I'm happy to see a "collectable" torn up and used to make "Art".

/and yes, I'd love to see someone use a Babe Ruth card to light a cigar.
 
2013-07-07 02:09:48 PM
This is a brilliant statement on the behalf of the artist on the subjectivity of nostalgia.  It's as if the artist is daring the viewer to ask themselves the question: What's more important?  Nostalgia in its purest, raw form, left untouched and unadulterated or the use of those memories to create something new and greater?  To the collector, the comics used were worth $30k because they represent a collectible keepsake from days gone by in the most original form possible.  To the artist, they were merely paper that fit his artistic vision and lent themselves to something that, in his mind, was of more value: the creation of his statue.   The piece forces us to ask ourselves if the comfort of the security blanket that is nostalgia is worth the value we ascribe to it or if we should cherish those memories but make new ones as well.

Or the artist had no idea what comics he had and just thought they were pretty enough to put on his statue.
 
2013-07-07 02:37:59 PM
Who's the artist, Peter Max?
 
2013-07-07 03:13:34 PM
...or he used a worthless reproduction, and after cutting it up and soaking it in paste, hopes nobody will notice, but he will certainly enjoy the free publicity.
 
2013-07-07 03:29:33 PM
So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!
 
2013-07-07 03:34:59 PM
Worst Comic book store owner EVER.
 
2013-07-07 03:35:03 PM
He should put it on that yacht from the other thread.
 
2013-07-07 03:35:50 PM
Meh.

Never understood why folks would pay thousands for a comic book anyways.

Or a sports card.
 
2013-07-07 03:36:37 PM
i291.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-07 03:37:36 PM

eggrolls: So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!


Not a very good correlation there skippy. Troll harder.
 
2013-07-07 03:37:41 PM

Sgt Otter: ...or he used a worthless reproduction, and after cutting it up and soaking it in paste, hopes nobody will notice, but he will certainly enjoy the free publicity.


^THIS^
 
2013-07-07 03:38:44 PM
Simpsons didit.

MrBurnsPaysHomerToEatRareComicInFrontOfComicBookGuy.jpg
 
2013-07-07 03:42:11 PM

The_Sponge: FirstNationalBastard: Second, it's better to see an old, valuable comic like this actually used for something as opposed to sealed in mylar, or worse, locked in a slab of lucite so that it will never be touched by air or human hands again, but will retain its "collectible value".


Wrong.

Do you think it would be totally cool if I used a Babe Ruth baseball card to light a cigar?


Apples/oranges.  It would be totally cool to turn that Babe Ruth baseball card into an origami baseball mitt.
 
2013-07-07 03:42:15 PM

Tony_Pepperoni: Sgt Otter: ...or he used a worthless reproduction, and after cutting it up and soaking it in paste, hopes nobody will notice, but he will certainly enjoy the free publicity.

^THIS^


Hopefully that's the case, but I'm reminded of the guy who bought one of Senna's F1 cars and then made it into a sculpture based on airfix model kits.

The car should have been left alone and placed in a museum.
 
2013-07-07 03:42:32 PM
static.tvtropes.org
 
2013-07-07 03:45:52 PM

The_Sponge: FirstNationalBastard: Second, it's better to see an old, valuable comic like this actually used for something as opposed to sealed in mylar, or worse, locked in a slab of lucite so that it will never be touched by air or human hands again, but will retain its "collectible value".


Wrong.

Do you think it would be totally cool if I used a Babe Ruth baseball card to light a cigar?


No, but if you lit a Babe Ruth card with cigar I'd applaud.
 
2013-07-07 03:51:42 PM
farm8.staticflickr.com
 
2013-07-07 03:52:38 PM
Did anyone even click the article? The sculpture itself is more of an abomination than Batman and Robin and the Fantastic Four movies combined.
 
2013-07-07 03:53:16 PM

Savage Belief: eggrolls: So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!

Not a very good correlation there skippy. Troll harder.


Why not? It's  just a question of scale, isn't it?

/Skippy?
 
2013-07-07 03:53:57 PM
content.internetvideoarchive.com
I can give ya fifty bucks.
 
2013-07-07 03:54:26 PM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Who's the artist, Peter Max?


Amazing story.
 
2013-07-07 03:56:05 PM

eggrolls: So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!


What you're describing are rare, one of a kind objects.

Even assuming this was a first printing, this was a mass produced periodical that probably printed somewhere north of a million copies, with thousands still in existence, many of which are now locked in plastic so the greedy little collectors can look at them.

The material inside the covers is available in roughly a dozen formats, from cheap black and white reprints to digital to a high end hardcover, on nice paper.
 
2013-07-07 03:56:25 PM

Abox: [content.internetvideoarchive.com image 320x240]
I can give ya fifty bucks. You beat me to it.

 
2013-07-07 03:58:56 PM
slumberpartymovies.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-07-07 03:59:54 PM
Dear artist;  Your work of art will never be worth as much as the comics were.
 
2013-07-07 04:07:48 PM

Tony_Pepperoni: Sgt Otter: ...or he used a worthless reproduction, and after cutting it up and soaking it in paste, hopes nobody will notice, but he will certainly enjoy the free publicity.

^THIS^


According to the sourced link in that piece the artist says he found the comics in the trash and didn't go out and spend a shiat ton of money of them so yeah, I'm calling shenanigans on this too.

Laughing off the revelation, Mr Vickers said: "If somebody chucks things out in the skip they don't generally throw things out that are worth anything.

[unlikely] tag goes where?

Meanwhile some artist I've never heard of before and some comic shop I've never heard of get ink.

/I'm assuming "Skip" means "trash" here, I've never actually encountered that particular bit of Brit-speak  before.
//Hopefully some more UK conversant Farker can either confirm or deny this.
 
2013-07-07 04:10:26 PM
Those comic books were probably worth more than his entire country.
 
2013-07-07 04:25:31 PM

quatchi: Tony_Pepperoni: Sgt Otter: ...or he used a worthless reproduction, and after cutting it up and soaking it in paste, hopes nobody will notice, but he will certainly enjoy the free publicity.

^THIS^

According to the sourced link in that piece the artist says he found the comics in the trash and didn't go out and spend a shiat ton of money of them so yeah, I'm calling shenanigans on this too.

Laughing off the revelation, Mr Vickers said: "If somebody chucks things out in the skip they don't generally throw things out that are worth anything.

[unlikely] tag goes where?

Meanwhile some artist I've never heard of before and some comic shop I've never heard of get ink.

/I'm assuming "Skip" means "trash" here, I've never actually encountered that particular bit of Brit-speak  before.
//Hopefully some more UK conversant Farker can either confirm or deny this.


A 'skip' is UKspeak for 'dumpster'.
It's like a big dustbin.
 
2013-07-07 04:27:54 PM

eggrolls: So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!


Yes, because a comic book has the same cultural significance as any of these things...
 
2013-07-07 04:28:13 PM
Unless he used the original artwork, the only people who should be upset are collectors. Art and collecting have nothing in common. Art is about ideas. Collecting is about greed. Never judge art by its price.
 
2013-07-07 04:28:21 PM

FirstNationalBastard: eggrolls: So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!

What you're describing are rare, one of a kind objects.

Even assuming this was a first printing, this was a mass produced periodical that probably printed somewhere north of a million copies, with thousands still in existence, many of which are now locked in plastic so the greedy little collectors can look at them.

The material inside the covers is available in roughly a dozen formats, from cheap black and white reprints to digital to a high end hardcover, on nice paper.


There about 200 'original' copies of the 'Dunlap boradside' of the Declaration out there. Today, 26 are known to survive. Shakepeare's first folio was mass produced, at least 750 copies made, sold at a pound each. Just over 200 exist today. Time plus scarcity equals a million dollars for a Superman comic from 1938. Would you settle for a black and white copy of any of those on display in a museum?  If someone were to find a copy of 'Midnight in London', would it be irrelevant? After all, there were thousands of prints made. Once we reproduce it, we can just throw out the originals NASA did the same with the original moon landing films. No loss there, right?

History isn't just information. It's also the objects that came through history - the physical record of what has been. The idea of 'tactile memory' is important. You can look at a picture of the Hope Diamond. It's not the same as holding it, is it?
 
2013-07-07 04:35:32 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-07 04:36:18 PM

Glitchwerks: Tony_Pepperoni: Sgt Otter: ...or he used a worthless reproduction, and after cutting it up and soaking it in paste, hopes nobody will notice, but he will certainly enjoy the free publicity.

^THIS^

Hopefully that's the case, but I'm reminded of the guy who bought one of Senna's F1 cars and then made it into a sculpture based on airfix model kits.

The car should have been left alone and placed in a museum.


I heard that there are top men working on it right now.

Ultimately, I suppose, the fact that people will pay lots of money for things that have little material value is a central tenet of capitalism. That is to say, there's a lot of people with more money than sense.

The K Foundation Burn a Million Quid: is it art, or stupidity?
 
2013-07-07 04:36:58 PM

Great_Milenko: eggrolls: So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!

Yes, because a comic book has the same cultural significance as any of these things...


The Constitution clearly had immediate value and significance, but neither Lennon's notebook scribbles or DaVicni's work had much relevance or value in their own time frame. Cultural significance comes later. Often much later. If anybody knew what that would be when it happened, we'd still have copies of Shakespeare's 'Love's Labor Won' and 'Cardenio'.
 
2013-07-07 04:39:18 PM

Tillmaster: A 'skip' is UKspeak for 'dumpster'.
It's like a big dustbin.


Ah, Ta! 10 years of watching Corry and I've never encountered it.

More of an Eastenders thing, maybe?
 
2013-07-07 04:40:35 PM
It's just a piece of paper.
 
2013-07-07 04:42:43 PM

eggrolls: FirstNationalBastard: eggrolls: So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!

What you're describing are rare, one of a kind objects.

Even assuming this was a first printing, this was a mass produced periodical that probably printed somewhere north of a million copies, with thousands still in existence, many of which are now locked in plastic so the greedy little collectors can look at them.

The material inside the covers is available in roughly a dozen formats, from cheap black and white reprints to digital to a high end hardcover, on nice paper.

There about 200 'original' copies of the 'Dunlap boradside' of the Declaration out there. Today, 26 are known to survive. Shakepeare's first folio was mass produced, at least 750 copies made, sold at a pound each. Just over 200 exist today. Time plus scarcity equals a million dollars for a Superman comic from 1938. Would you settle for a black and white copy of any of those on display in a museum?  If someone were to find a copy of 'Midnight in London', would it be irrelevant? After all, there were thousands of prints made. Once we reproduce it, we can just throw out the originals NASA did the same with the original moon landing films. No loss there, right?

History isn't just information. It's also the objects that came through history - the physical record of what has been. The idea of 'tactile memory' is important. You can look at a picture of the Hope Diamond. It's not the same as holding it, is it?

All of this.
 
2013-07-07 04:46:54 PM

FirstNationalBastard: I'd love to see someone use a Babe Ruth card to light a cigar.


Well... I'd love to see a cigar light up a chocolate bar.

/who the fark is babe ruth, and what the eff does she have to do with the price of bread, anyways?!?
 
2013-07-07 04:48:18 PM

FirstNationalBastard: Even assuming this was a first printing, this was a mass produced periodical that probably printed somewhere north of a million copies, with thousands still in existence, many of which are now locked in plastic so the greedy little collectors can look at them.


I was watching an antiques show and someone had the Corgi James Bond Lotus Esprit from The Spy Who Loved Me that I had. It was all "thankfully it was kept in a box" or it wouldn't be worth as much.

And I was like, no, that was built for children to play with. Mine was played with until the wheel broke and then put in a bin.

I feel the same about comics, and in fact, I think comics have stopped being what they were. As a kid, you could go into a news shop and next to the papers would be the comics. They would be bought by kids, read and disposed of. Today, they seem to be sold in comic shops, where they are sold like fine old art prints to people in their 20s and upwards.
 
2013-07-07 04:48:22 PM

The_Y2P_Problem: This is a brilliant statement on the behalf of the artist on the subjectivity of nostalgia.  It's as if the artist is daring the viewer to ask themselves the question: What's more important?  Nostalgia in its purest, raw form, left untouched and unadulterated or the use of those memories to create something new and greater?  To the collector, the comics used were worth $30k because they represent a collectible keepsake from days gone by in the most original form possible.  To the artist, they were merely paper that fit his artistic vision and lent themselves to something that, in his mind, was of more value: the creation of his statue.   The piece forces us to ask ourselves if the comfort of the security blanket that is nostalgia is worth the value we ascribe to it or if we should cherish those memories but make new ones as well.

Or the artist had no idea what comics he had and just thought they were pretty enough to put on his statue.


I think this is the part people take issue with. The statue isn't 'greater', it's just a statue. If it had been, say, recycled with the paper used for a reboot edition?  Fark yes that would've been awesome (provided the reboot was honestly better than the original). But for that crappy thing? Uh...no.
 
2013-07-07 04:58:54 PM
In this thread:

Hoarders argue what they do is good for humanity.
 
2013-07-07 05:05:06 PM

eggrolls: Savage Belief: eggrolls: So if it's ok to trash someone else's art to make your own, we should let him make his next 'masterpiece' out of the Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution. It's fun to destroy something that's valuable to other people!

Not a very good correlation there skippy. Troll harder.

Why not? It's  just a question of scale, isn't it?

/Skippy?


Not really. You're trying to compare things that there have only ever been very few, or one of to things that once numbered in the tens of thousands. Big difference, skippy.
 
2013-07-07 05:06:25 PM

Satanic_Hamster: Dear artist;  Your work of art will never be worth as much as the comics were.


What's ironic is that if the artist hasn't said just that in the article, your post would have had a potential worth to the artist as advice should he have been a Fark reader.

As it is, your own post has less value than it had in your mind, creating the very situation you were presuming.
 
2013-07-07 05:10:13 PM
"I really love the idea of me creating something out of such expensive things that's worth less. I think it's brilliant."
"I really love the idea of me creating something out of such expensive things"
"I really love the idea of me creating something "
"I really love the idea of me."
"I really love me."

/I think it's brilliant
 
2013-07-07 05:11:28 PM

ryarger: Satanic_Hamster: Dear artist;  Your work of art will never be worth as much as the comics were.

What's ironic is that if the artist hasn't said just that in the article, your post would have had a potential worth to the artist as advice should he have been a Fark reader.

As it is, your own post has less value than it had in your mind, creating the very situation you were presuming.


That's well postmodern.

Or, perhaps, shallow and pedantic.

/mind=blown
 
2013-07-07 05:18:31 PM

eggrolls: Mona Lisa, John Lennon's handwritten lyrics, and the Constitution


because unique original works created by hand are exactly the same as mass produced printed works amirite?

collecting comics to read them and have entire sets is fine

collecting ERMAGERD PRICELESS SEAL IT IN PLASTIC TOUCH IT WITH GLOVES comics is high on chromosomes.
 
2013-07-07 05:18:48 PM
"Artist"

img.fark.net
 
Displayed 50 of 82 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report