November 10, 2006

• Hmm.. Link sent me to the NYT main page, then crashed IE. (Don't tell me to use firefox. I'm at work, and I have no choice.)
• Worked on try 2. Why didn't she sell it for the $9 million??! People like that don't deserve to find priceless paintings!
• Print page work better? Also, coming soon to a theatre near you (but certainly not to my town).
• I woulda taken the $9 mill in heartbeat. Greed is an amazing thing.
• Turned down the nine mil, and still living in a trailer? Somebody should buy her some Frank Norris. With any luck, the painting will go unsold, sh'll die poor, and her Estate will be devoured by litigation.
• This looked like a good article but it stops short and requires registration so I said "F* it" and didn't post it. Except for here.
• What a #&k$% c*@$ s*$% bag!! She'd rather burn it than settle for less than $50MM? I hope she get's what she's after.
• The Telegraph has a good one, too.
• Jackson Pollock had some paint; he chucked it at the floor, And then some lady bought it for five dollars at the store.
• Great, crazy story. I typically admire people who take on the establishment or the wealthy. In this case, I think she is just an idiot.
• What, she's holding out for a better deal and you think she's an idiot? I think she's absolutely right on, and the publicity is only making it more likely that she'll get it.
• *cries*
• What does Pollock's art usually sell for? I have no clue whether she's asking something realistic (assuming it really is a Pollock piece) or whether she's delusional beyond belief.
• It's not like she is being offered nine thousand dollars (enough to pay off some credit cards, eg) and thinks she can get fifty thousand (enough to get out of debt, pay off her car, and put a downpayment on a house, eg). Nine million and fifty million are both enough for her to pay off her debt, buy whatever she wants to live in, and provide for her for the rest of her life. Nine and fifty million do almost the same thing. Every year she spends of her life not selling the painting is another year that she could be living in relative comfort.
• David Geffen Sells Jackson Pollock for $140 Million Essentially the same story, from the Guardian That price is unconfirmed. (The sale occurred earlier this month.) The average going price for a Pollock does seem to be in the $30-60m range. Sometimes they call him "Jack the Dripper". This amuses me.
• A Pollock for $11.65 million in 2004. A Pollock for $140 million in 2006. However, these are sold by reputable people. Not poor white trash women living in trailers. She should take what she can get.
• Oh, and I agree she should keep holding out. If it is genuine, $9m is an insulting "take advantage of the poor, unedumacated hick" kind of offer.
• Besides, it's given her fame and opportunity like she's never had before. Keep riding that ticket, lady.
• However, these are sold by reputable people. Not poor white trash women living in trailers. Fascinating perspective, what do you think a homeless black trash man could get for it? And how about a middle class asian?
• she's on Letterman tonight.
• I enjoy laughing at people who are lower than me in class. They're so stupid!
• I wish her well. At the least, she'll have had the fun of dickering. But from a more practical vantage, the insurance rates alone would run sky-high, particularly if it's being stored in a trailer! So ye'd likely go into the hole and down with a loud sucking noise in next to no time.
• she popped into a thrift store in San Bernardino on the Californian coast to find a gift for a depressed friend. I believe this painting and the 9 million dollar offer would have cheered me up considerably. However, these are sold by reputable people. I think the problem is instead one of provenance. If its ownership could be traced back to Pollock, there would be no problem. Bernockle's comment is right on.
• I would like to add for the record than my mother's cat is named Jackson Potluck.
• Hey, bees has a point! It's just in a trailer! We could probably go steal it, no problem. To the monkeymobile!
• What amazes me is that Jackson Pollock's artwork sells for that much. He was a hack. I laughed when I read this: “Before I let them take advantage of me,” she said, smiling broadly, “I’ll burn that son of a bitch.” I hope the end the movie with her burning it, while freaky weirdo art collectors wail and gnash their teeth. The she gives them the finger. Then some bartender tea bags one of the collectors, and everybody learns to get along and has a party. Her sister, who bartends at a gay bar arrives, and her boyfriend who works at the laundromat arrives, and she is happy.
• But not before her boyfriend who works at the laundromat tries to wash all the splashed paint spills off the canvas with his trust Tide Kick™.
• I see absolutely nothing wrong in this. She's asking for the fair market value of this item. Her background should not matter. It speaks volumes of people both wealthy and not (see this thread) who think it does. Essentially she's saying "I know im not a wealthy connected person but this thing has value. I want that value." Why she should sell it for 1/5th the price is beyond me. If snobs dont want to pay for something 'white trash' people have touched then this woman's protest shows the biases and prejudices that many people accept in our culture. If David Geffen touched it its worth 60 million. For shame. A part of me wishes she does burn it in protest. That would be art. But unfortunately the art busioness has nothing to do with art, but with commerce. Some people think they can get this painting for under 10 million and laugh with their rich friends at how well they ripped off the 'white trash' lady. Guess they wont be laughing now.
• What amazes me is that Jackson Pollock's artwork sells for that much. He was a hack. Agreed.
• I bet you if they offered her a good trade she would part with it. I kid, I kid.
• Lowbot, the only problem I see with your comment is that there is no verification that it's a real Pollock. If she's asking fair market value, then fine -- although perhaps she would get more of a response as a seller if she went through a known art dealer (and lose something in the commission, no doubt) -- but asking 50 million for a painting when she has only some random guy's evidence that it's Jackson Pollock's in the first place. Hello, run-on sentences much?
• The other point about her financial status is that, needing the money more than others might, she might be better off to sell for less than its value. The loss in cash would be offset by the immediacy of the payoff, and the effect it would have on her circumstances. That's why she's an idiot.
• Actually I think she is already bringing in cash for this. They are making a movie about her. I wanna see it. I wanna see her sass some snobbish art collectors.
• Actually I think she is already bringing in cash for this. They are making a movie about her. Absolutely. She's actually making a rather brilliant financial decision. The fact is that this painting even if not a real Pollack now has added value because of the attention that this story is getting. And what makes this story truly great is what it's revealing about class perceptions in our society.
• I wanna see it. I wanna see her sass some snobbish art collectors. She's the Erin Brokovich of the art world!
• The movie has already been made, seen by some but not yet released. Just because this woman liked to go dumpster diving and thrift store shopping doesn't make her some irresponsible remedial degenerate. From what i've seen of her, she seems not only grounded, but quite the tough cookie, sensible and self respecting. Whether or not she "wins," it's a point of principle more than anything else to her and not what's going to insure or deny her a life of value. Hasn't anyone else ever known a true trucker broad? Hasn't anyone else actually seen a Pollack live in person? Whether you like his work or hate it, reproductions do no justice and just spawn that idiotic idea that any splatter is "art"-- --now i'm off gonna get some white crosses at the truck stop--
• Hey ethylene! Personally, I think this is nothing but a real-life version of Deal or No Deal. It's the way in which everyone pushes their luck that I find offensive. It's money falling from the sky, and there's this sense of entitlement that they're owed more somehow. The smartest thing to do is take the money and run. Lady Luck is a fickle mistress, and easily pissed-off. When she shines on you, accept gracefully, and bow out.
• Hear hear Louis!
• I would have taken the money. That's all I'm saying. $9 million could make me happy for life.
• I could make you happy for life, or terribly uncomfortable for about 5 minutes.
• Is this a real Jackson Pollock? A mysterious trove of pictures rocks the art world.
• Controversial Pollock for sale in Toronto. Didn't realize she was 76. That makes her more of an idiot -- how much money is she looking to spend in her years left?
• Horton says she has no plans to move out of her California mobile home and instead wants to help families, including two of her sons, who have lost their homes because of the mortgage crisis. Jeezus -- her sons were kicked out into the street during the time she's been holding out? What. The. Hell.
• Robbery scare prompts gallery to put 'famous painting' in hiding. Never having seen the painting before -- if it is a Pollock, it's not a very good one. And to beat this dead horse just that little bit more, any problems with a work's provenance is going to affect its value. That's just a rule of the marketplace, and you're not going to escape it. Sorry.