Art experts are lame


They're only judging the painting by what they've seen before, what they think is a Pollock painting..gee pretty ridiculously biased isn't it? Since they don't have legit jobs, no degree needed to be an "art critic" they're snooty, imbeciles screaming for others to punch them in the face.

My dad bought a first edition "Slaughter-House-five" for 1.50 at a thrift store...this past year. He's bought signed copies of books for 2.00 too, anything can be found at a thrift store. Art critics are idiots, they're the kinds who don't think anything exists outside of their little, neat, anal bubble.
So glad I left art school.

"And then I was being chased my an improperly filled in bubble screaming 'None of the above!' ".

reply

I'm not sure where you get the idea that art critics--at least respected ones in positions at important cultural institutions--don't have a degree or quality education.

I think Hoving's a complete a_sshat, but he's an intelligent person.

Valuable things end up at thrift stores, but it's still unusual. The painting is suspect--it lacks a signature, there's no record of it being produced or previously owned. It would be silly to accept it as an authentic Pollock because it has a similar style.

reply