The 15 Most Expensive Paintings in the World
In 2006, media mogul David Geffen sold Jackson Pollock’s masterwork, No. 5 1948, for $140 million. This made Pollock’s work the most expensive painting in modern history, leading a list of the world’s most highly acclaimed artists. From Pollock to Picasso, Renoir to Van Gogh, famouse fine art fetches an other-wordly price on today’s market. In celebration of their masterworks and the riches now behind them, here is a list of the 15 most expensive paintings in the world.
To round out this list, we’ve arranged these paintings by an adjusted price in 2008 dollars. The U.S. dollar has inflated quite a bit since 1987, when Van Gogh’s Irises sold for $53.9 million. Today, that $53.9 million is worth roughly $102.3 million.
Number Fifteen: Yo, Picasso by Pablo Picasso
Picasso’s 1901 self-portrait may not be his most instantly recognizable, but it certainly did capture a hefty price on the fine art market. Long before Picasso began experimenting with cubism and surrealism, his early oil works were equally as stunning. An interesting anecdote about Picasso– his full name is “Pablo Diego José Francisco de Paula Juan Nepomuceno MarÃa de los Remedios Cipriano de la SantÃsima Trinidad Martyr Patricio Clito RuÃz y Picasso”. No joke.
- Artist: Pablo Picasso
- Year: 1901
- Year of Sale: 1989
- Sale Price: $47.85 million
- Currency Adjusted: $83.2 million
Number Fourteen: A Wheatfield with Cypresses by Vincent Van Gogh
One of two Van Gogh landscapes in the top 15 is A Wheatfield by Cypresses, an idyllic nature scene with the artist’s signature swirling skies. Wheatfield was owned by philanthropist/diplomat Walter Annenberg until his death in 2002, and is now a part of his estate.
- Artist: Vincent Van Gogh
- Year: 1889
- Year of Sale: 1993
- Sale Price: $57 million
- Currency Adjusted: $85.1 million
Number Thirteen: False Start by Jasper Johns
The lone contemporary piece in the top 15 was among a large collection of art sold by media mogul David Geffen in 2006. If you’re like us, you might just be scratching your head about the pricetag on this one…
- Artist: Jasper Johns
- Year: 1959
- Year of Sale: 2006
- Sale Price: $80 million
- Currency Adjusted: $85.6 million
Number Twelve: Les Noces de Pierrette by Pablo Picasso
Picasso’s Les Noces de Pierrette is among the artist’s blue period, including some of his most famous works. At the time, Picasso was facing poverty and the loss of a close friend who had recently committed suicide. It was works like this that would prove cathartic for the artist- and lead him to wealth later in life.
- Artist: Pablo Picasso
- Year: 1905
- Year of Sale: 1989
- Sale Price: $49.3 million
- Currency Adjusted: $85.7 million
Number Eleven: Triptych by Francis Bacon
As one of the premier artists of the surrealist period, Irish painter Francis Bacon explored the tri-panel format of painting called the Triptych. His work of the same name is the most recent sale on this list, going for $86.3 million.
- Artist: Francis Bacon
- Year: 1976
- Year of Sale: 2008
- Sale Price: $86.3 million
- Currency Adjusted: $86.3 million
Number Ten: Massacre of the Innocents by Peter Paul Rubens
Peter Paul Rubens’ Massacre of the Innocents is both the earliest work on this list as well as its only religious-inspired painting. Painted in 1611, Massacre represents a scene from the Bible’s Gospel According to Matthew.
- Artist: Peter Paul Rubens
- Year: 1611
- Year of Sale: 2002
- Sale Price: $76.7 million
- Currency Adjusted: $91.9 million
Number Nine: Portrait de l’artiste sans barbe by Vincent Van Gogh
Van Gogh’s beardless self-portrait shows the artist hiding something– namely a nasty, Absinthe-fueled shaving accident. In the year of this portrait, Van Gogh cut off part of his ear amidst a bout of severe depression that would later lead to his suicide.
- Artist: Vincent Van Gogh
- Year: 1889
- Year of Sale: 1998
- Sale Price: $71.5 million
- Currency Adjusted: $94.6 million
Number Eight: Dora Maar au Chat by Pablo Picasso
One of Picasso’s greatest works was a portrait of his then-mistress Dora Maar. Miss Maar was 29-years-old at the time, 26 years younger than Picasso. The subject was seated with a black cat perched on her shoulder.
- Artist: Pablo Picasso
- Year: 1941
- Year of Sale: 2006
- Sale Price: $95.2 million
- Currency Adjusted: $101.8 million
Number Seven: Irises by Vincent Van Gogh
Van Gogh’s second landscape on this list is named simply Irises, showing at first glance a rather sunny world that was much in contrast to the artist’s disposition.
- Artist: Vincent Van Gogh
- Year: 1889
- Year of Sale: 1987
- Sale Price: $53.9 million
- Currency Adjusted: $102.3 million
Number Six: Garçon à la pipe by Pablo Picasso
The “boy at the pipe” is Picasso’s most highly priced painting on this list, having sold for $104.2 million in 2004 (currency adjusted to $118.9 million). The boy in the painting was among the community of entertainers living in the Montmartre section of Paris, many of which were the subjects of Picasso’s red period.
- Artist: Pablo Picasso
- Year: 1905
- Year of Sale: 2004
- Sale Price: $104.2 million
- Currency Adjusted: $118.9 million
Number Five: Bal au moulin de la Galette, Montmartre by Pierre-Auguste Renoir
Renoir’s sole entry in the top 15 most expensive paintings is his work Bal au moulin de la Galette. This painting was sold in 1990 to Ryoei Saito, the chairman of a Japanese paper company and a collector of fine art.
- Artist: Pierre-Auguste Renoir
- Year: 1876
- Year of Sale: 1990
- Sale Price: $78.1 million
- Currency Adjusted: $128.8 million
Number Four: Portrait of Dr. Gachet by Vincent Van Gogh
This and the last painting were at one point the two most expensive paintings in the world, sold together to Ryoei Saito in 1990. This would become Van Gogh’s most expensive painting to date, selling for an impressive $82.5 million ($136.1 million today).
- Artist: Vincent Van Gogh
- Year: 1890
- Year of Sale: 1990
- Sale Price: $82.5 million
- Currency Adjusted: $136.1 million
Number Three: Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I by Gustav Klimt
Once the world’s most expensive painting, Gustav Klimt’s portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer took three years to create in oil and gold. The painting was commissioned by a Swiss sugar magnate, a fan of Klimt and the husband of the painting’s subject.
- Artist: Gustav Klimt
- Year: 1907
- Year of Sale: 2006
- Sale Price: $135 million
- Currency Adjusted: $144.4 million
Number Two: Woman III by Willem de Kooning
This, the second most-expensive painting in the world was among the collection sold by David Geffen in 2006. Woman III by Willem de Kooning was among six painted by the artist between 1951 and 1953, with this version ending up at the Tehran Museum of Contemporary Art– where it would be later hid from the public due to its inadherence to the government’s rules of morality.
- Artist: Willem de Kooning
- Year: 1953
- Year of Sale: 2006
- Sale Price: $137.5 million
- Currency Adjusted: $147 million
Number One: No. 5, 1948 by Jackson Pollock
Jackson Pollock’s 1948 painting entitled No. 5 1948 was arguably his greatest masterwork, the most vivid expression of the painter’s unique style. When it was sold by David Geffen in 2006, it became the world’s most expensive painting in history at a price-adjusted $149.70 million dollars.
- Artist: Jackson Pollock
- Year: 1948
- Year of Sale: 2006
- Sale Price: $140 million
- Currency Adjusted: $149.70 million
Of these top 15, you’ve seen Vincent Van Gogh mentioned quite a bit. Van Gogh leads this list with $418.1 million worth of art, followed by Pablo Picasso with $389.6 million. Note also that Gustav Klimt’s painting Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I should have placed twice on this list, as a second version painted by Klimt also sold for $94 million. In the interest of completeness, we excluded the second version.
Thanks for reading, StyleCravers, Diggers, Stumblers and otherwise. What do you think about this list? Do you think these paintings merit these prices? Let us know in the comments, and let us know which painting is your favorite from this list.
Loading ...Want to see some more pricey works of art? Check out the 10 most expensive cars in the world.
Monday, November 24, 2008 11:10PM
what about the mona lisa?
Monday, November 24, 2008 11:42PM
Ok, seriously, why. I don’t understand. I bet that most people, including professionals, couldn’t tell an expensive painting from an amateur painting. Why not, invest in alternative energy or fund aids research
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 1:11AM
the most expensive painting is that?! i dont get it… if i drew something similar but slightly different.. went back in time.. and swapped it.. i bet they’d still pay that much just b/c its old, from that artist, etc etc..
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 1:21AM
The best paintings are always the most abstract. Though I understand that last painting, although it looks like it was just thrown on its actually very very detailed.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 3:01AM
Why does Woman III sit at the bottom of the list? the expressionism is overwhelming compared to any other piece in this article.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 3:29AM
I must be an incult, but number 1 …
I don’t understand the Contemporary Art.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 9:46AM
If you adjust the insurance valuation for interest, the Mona Lisa will be at the top of the list… Some 600+ million…
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:14AM
it’s all about the returns, silly jimmy
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:22AM
Since Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I is ranked as #1 in your poll, why not update and link us to ver 2?
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 11:44AM
Hey Kevin– you can take a look at that here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adele_Bloch-Bauer_II
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 11:54AM
one man’s “overwhelming expressionism” is another man’s “dogsh*t smeared on canvas”
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 11:54AM
whatever happened to van gogh’s “sunflowers”? i thought that would surely be on the list. it set records back in thre late 1980s, i’m positive.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 1:21PM
During my 4 years as a student at the Cleveland Institute of Art I had the luxury of attending a school directly across the street from the Cleveland Museum of Art – one of the best art museums in the world.
There were days I would sit by the hour in front of any of the Rubens paintings enjoying and analyzing them. I just had to vote for Rubens in your poll. Sorry, but he, Dali, and da Vinci top my list.
However, with regard to other comments like, “What about Mona Lisa?” I don’t think that painting (which I’ve seen in the Louvre) or the painting of “The Last Supper” in Milan, qualify. Why not? Because a price cannot be assigned to them as they’ve not been on the market.
Are they better paintings? You betcha, but cannot be adequately valued.
Phil Payne
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 5:35PM
The Kooning, Pollock, and Klimt are all terribly over-priced. Their owners must be banging their heads against walls right now. To this day, I can’t believe that that fool paid $140 million dollars for a Pollock painting.
$140 MILLION DOLLARS
Tuesday, November 25, 2008 11:23PM
If any of you critics here can actually replicate a Jackson Pollock with the same visual integrity, aesthetic zeal, and harmonious formalism, I will personally pay you $140 million for it. And then I will wake up because you will never ever be capable of such talent, nor will you ever even understand it. So why bother commenting on somehting that’s completely beyond your range of thought. Run along and play some organized sports.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008 8:41AM
Pollock was a wanker. His ‘art’ is useful, though. It exposes insufferable poseurs who think they are somehow more enlightened and sophisticated than us poor provincials.
Harmonious formalism, my ass.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008 4:52PM
At least the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer was stolen by the Nazis from the family home in Austria and its return is still being sought by the rightful owners. Too bad stolen goods are on this list.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008 11:59PM
It’s the artists name attached to the picture that adds a huge value to it, not what the actual picture looks like.
Friday, November 28, 2008 7:47AM
I just love Klimt. And Caravaggio and Egon Schiele (they had to be in that list!)
Friday, November 28, 2008 3:03PM
[...] this week which received plenty of attention around the web. First, we collected a list of the 15 most expensive paintings in the world. There was plenty of controversy about the #1 painting, be sure to head on over there and weigh [...]
Tuesday, December 2, 2008 7:50AM
i probably sound nuts but i have never been able to figure out why picasso is considered to be a genius.most of his paitings are sooooo wierd and to me show a completely warped mind.to be honest i couldnt find anything so mind blowing about these pics except the names of the people who painted them.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008 10:56AM
They don’t look like they are worth more than a few bucks each. The frame would be worth more to me.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008 2:21PM
This has been one of the more interesting items yet placed on StyleCrave. I love it!!
We are all free to disagree and that is what is so great, here, and why so interesting.
As an art college graduate, and one who was lucky enough to have a 40+ year career as an artist/designer my perspective might be a bit different and, yet, the same as the rest of you writers in a lot of ways.
Like some, I cannot fully understand “modern art”, either. My favorite is Rubens. Klimt nearly got my vote. Yet, Jackson Pollock’s work has always enthralled me. Go figure.
Some pieces of artwork are definitely over priced. Maybe “I’ve got it and you don’t” is justification for some buyers. Indeed, as “Buddy” mentions, sometimes the frame is worth more. All these arguments certify “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.
Picasso had a strong talent. I like his earlier works, to a degree, and admire his paintings of the horrors of the Spanish civil war defining the fear, pain, and anguish of it all. The rest of his work, though, is so much crap. I think he went for the bucks and not for the quality of art in his later career.
Phil Payne
Tuesday, December 2, 2008 4:09PM
And what is missing by viewing any artwork by way of electronics is what the piece will do to you in person.
There, the spirit of the artist will touch your molecules with theirs—and you won’t even know it.
It makes me grateful for museums forwhy it allows us all priceless access to that energy field.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008 9:32PM
Not comming from a background in any kind of art I found this article an enjoyable read. I don’t claim to understand the genius these artists have, I dont quite get why the first three are more desirable. The top three are the ones I’d choose last, I’d love to understand why these paintings are so admired.
for the recored my favourites are: Les Noces de Pierrette, A Wheatfield with Cypresses and False Start.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008 11:21PM
One must remember to look at these paintings in the context in which they were painted in order to appreciate their genius and therefore value. It’s easy to say for example that the Pollack looks like something anyone could do, but when he did it it was totally something new and astounding.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 8:41AM
Very cool article! I actually knew only of Jasper John’s American Flags painting after having seen it in the Moma – but I still don’t get his style.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 2:09PM
You mention: “Miss Maar was 29-years-old at the time, 26 years younger than Picasso.” Picasso was 3 at the time he was seeing Miss Maar?
What a Stud!
I really do love his work, my fave being Les Demoiselles d’Avignon.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 6:10PM
hey tx…29 + 26 is 55…I’m not really sure why you used subtraction
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 7:23PM
How is that Jackson Pollock painting better than my shit.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 8:03PM
It says Miss Maar was 26 years YOUNGER than Picasso. Picasso was 55 at the time.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 9:22PM
Incorrectly titled “most expensive painting”…they are the highest paid price painting. Skewed toward resently sold works….all in list were sold in last 20 years. These are definately NOT the 15 most valuable paintings.
Thursday, December 4, 2008 1:23AM
@Benvolio:
You’re right, they are not the “15 most valuable paintings”, the article doesn’t say that– they are the 15 most expensive paintings. There is no other way of truly determining a price other than a market transaction. All of these made that test– as thus they are the 15 most expensive.
Thursday, December 4, 2008 10:00AM
David,
thanks for the clarification
I’m an artist, not very good w/ #’s.
Friday, December 5, 2008 2:57AM
I am tired of people bitching about Jackson Pollock. Everyone thinks he just chucked paint at a canvas but that couldn’t be farther from the truth. His paintings were all about action, chaos, and movement. No, it doesn’t look like anything, it doesn’t have to. And if you’ve ever tried to paint with his drip-style you know that although you can come up with something interesting, it’s not that easy to make paintings as captivating and energizing as his are. People who doubt it should really try to see some of his work in real life – it is amazing.
Friday, December 5, 2008 10:26AM
no becky…it’s not
Friday, December 5, 2008 11:42PM
Becky, I agree with you wholeheartedly. David, you really need to experience a Pollock to understand
Saturday, December 6, 2008 10:25PM
[...] love big budget museums. How else would I ever get to experience the molecular transference from one artist to [...]
Tuesday, December 9, 2008 12:17PM
[...] The 15 Most Expensive Paintings in the World [...]
Sunday, January 4, 2009 1:19AM
I love reading the righteous indignation of people who could care less about Art of any kind. Talent, Beauty and Value have absolutely nothing to do with each other… never have, never will.
Saturday, January 10, 2009 6:36AM
Oh my freakin gosh, most of you are idiots. You don't understand art or its asthetic apeal to individuals in the art world. Abstract paintings are not the most expensive paintings and in fact I would personally not label any art based on style. These painting were sold at their prices because that is what they are worth. The artists of these works were genius'. And these artists were some of the most greatest minds to ever walk this earth. Many of them were scientists, chemists, philosophers, artists, and sculpters. They understood life, observation, energy, motion,gesture, and movement which is why these paintings were painted the way the were. The art world does not always look to a painting based on the finely painted image because if that is what you want than you minus well take a picture with a camera, rather they focus on the energy of the peice, the motion and the gesture of how the paint was applied. And the mona lisa, my god, the only reason why all you bone heads mention that painting is because that is the only painting you know. You're all ignorant bastards. LEARN A LITTLE.
Monday, January 12, 2009 3:10AM
What a load of Pollocks !! I can think of many better ways to spend $140m… yachts, houses, jets, cars, oh and helping the poor and needy of course !
Monday, January 12, 2009 3:10AM
Fucking ridiculous. The most expensive painting is one of the worst paintings I've ever seen. Talentless bullshit.
Thursday, January 22, 2009 4:30AM
The price of a piece of art should be directly proportional to the amount of skill/talent it takes to create it. You shouldn't have to come up some with philosophical bullshit to justify why something is worthy of money, or praise for that matter.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009 5:49PM
Ok, philosophical bullshit. . .what the hell ever. Its not bullshit, its just how it is. Sorry if I have a little more knowledge of art history and present. And there are many art pieces that were done with very little skill and talent, but are valued at ridiculous prices. Ex: Damien Hirst sold one of the worlds most expensive pieces of contemporary art ever for 107 Million dollars. Yet the piece was just a platinum sculpture covered in diamonds. It does not take skill to do that, it takes an artist who made something of his name.
and realism is true art. . what the hell does that mean. You sound like an egotistical ignorant piece of crap who doesn't really know shit about shit, but thinks they do. and i don't have to justify anything, the art world justifies itself. So you sound like a person with alot of "skill and talent with realism" and if your little comment is true than you must sell your art for like what. . .hundreds of thousands and millions. . .
Tuesday, March 24, 2009 5:08PM
Pollock's work is also a record of the "dance" that went into its creation. His works contain the story of movement within the "text." This was a real epiphany for me in understanding his work.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009 5:11PM
When I first saw Van Gogh's Irises, I was lucky there was a bench in the gallery. My knees went weak and I had to sit down. I was transfixed for about fifteen minutes. I have never experienced a painting with that intense an effect before or since.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009 12:54AM
Maybe its just me, but its mindboggling to even think about why someone would spend so much money…. Don't get me wrong, I love art and I think its important to preserve these masterpieces. I just think that all this money can go to much more pressing issues like poverty, terrorism and education.
Saturday, May 16, 2009 9:49AM
The world's very greatest works of art are usually not for sale. You can't purchase a major painting by Da Vinci or Giotto or Breugel. They are in permanent collections of art museums, or in sites like the Vatican.
Monday, May 18, 2009 5:33PM
Aiden Fucking Ashlie –
"And the mona lisa, my god, the only reason why all you bone heads mention that painting is because that is the only painting you know. You're all ignorant bastards. LEARN A LITTLE. "
Umm…the Mona Lisa being so popular and well known is PRECISELY the reason so many people think it should be on the most expensive paintings list. Perhaps if you actually thought before verbally abusing the people posting here, this would have occurred to you.
Thursday, June 4, 2009 9:47PM
seriously, I'd not even pay more than 50$ for any of each… god!!!! that's unbelievable!!
Monday, July 20, 2009 7:30PM
The Mona Lisa was bought by a museum at a time when the museums had the most $ to buy. It will never be sold since the value is priceless.
Monday, July 20, 2009 7:33PM
Pollock's paintings show action. But, the value comes from the rarity of his works. Not many of them are around to buy.
Monday, July 20, 2009 7:36PM
Woman III is not considered one painting at "the bottom of the list." The most expensive and sort after paintings go from the least expensive (at the top) to the most expensive (at the bottom).
Wednesday, August 5, 2009 9:44AM
Van Gogh's self-portrait seems to me the best of all these works of art. Then Ruben's Massacre of the innocents. Then Van Gogh's Irises come in at third best place for me. Then the boy with a pipe…the rest dont interest me.
Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:16PM
Painting is an expression of oneself or thought or feeling in absract or in a portrait.
The use of colours ,strokes, depth and shades all count to give some satisfaction to a person. It is not about pricing. It is about the feeling I get when I see a painting therefore if a painting recieves much attention, and bought at even the most expensive treasure in the world, it is my treasure.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 4:15PM
i am with for this noble thought…
mans creations is some time so price less…at the end they forget the mankind to save and protect….
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 12:57PM
Not actually d most beautiful (Except Massacre),but all were class apart
Monday, September 7, 2009 6:40AM
The guy threw paint at a canvas! There is nothing detailed about it at all dip shit!! You know what's funny, my Nephew painted something very similar and he's 2.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009 4:57AM
lmao- a poor provincial indeed. Insufferable is the praise of ignorance as a natural and unencumbered state of being.The rise of the idiot to hero is a hallmark of the war of expertise. Arrogant are those that think they know better only relying on their "gut", while those that study and work at understanding are criticized for their education- being labeled "elite". Fools paradise- ignorance is bliss. Enlightment and sophistication starts with literacy, and continues through education. Start with your ABCs. Good luck.
Monday, October 19, 2009 10:13PM
My Wife was an Art Historian – When people would look at a Picasso, Bacon,deKooning, etc and say "I have a kid at home who could paint better than that". My wife would reply "Put that kid to work, you have sired a Zillionaire".
Sunday, October 25, 2009 2:22PM
I have one paints that can be a very expensive paint , but I don't know how I can sold it out please any one who is interesting to help me please call m to this number 009607715200 Rep Of Maldives , this is very special; request and its a very old paint , e mail I d , mdshah_76@yahoo.com
Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:43AM
my great granpa passed away and in the home there is a renoir painting of the ball at le moulin it is said ,he brought it more than thirty years ago when he worked at l a county museum. i wonder if it's real?
Sunday, November 8, 2009 7:23PM
here here my friend! I dont think I could have said it any better myself
Tuesday, November 10, 2009 2:33AM
Well, (without wanting too sound arrogant!?!) I can probably draw better then most people who will read this post. As an artist -in the traditional sense of the word- I find it very hard to find the appeal of Pollock's art (-I use the word 'art' in the loosest sense of the term) -it is nothing more, and nothing less then a mass of squiggles -free to be interpreted as the viewer sees fit (in my experience the more pretentious and arrogant the individual, the more this particular form of human expression 'appeals' to them).
Someone has stated in a previous post that they would give anyone who could produce a similar piece $140 million. I would very much like to take you up on your offer, granted it may take six months, or even a year -but it could be done (-without too much difficulty I hasten to add….).
Ask me to reproduce a Turner on the other hand… well you could give me a lifetime, and all the money in the world as a reward -and I still wouldn't be able to come even close!
-just the thoughts of a random artist…..
Tuesday, December 1, 2009 6:52PM
the mona lisa isn't listed because it was bought prior… when currency wasn't as high. these aren't the value but what people paid for them, the times reflect that. anyone who bases their personal value on art based on what it was bought is a moron.
Thursday, December 3, 2009 7:23AM
who knows about the mona lisa and mon’et????
Thursday, December 10, 2009 2:58AM
I lub art!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tuesday, December 15, 2009 1:01AM
It is no denying the fact that these are artists own expressions. Is this real art or brand syndrome. If these are the most expensive paintings then you will find at least few hundred original masterpieces with much sense in it. The entire money on this earth will not be sufficient to buy may be just few of them.May be I have no sense of art. I will be personally obliged if some one could clear this dark cloud from my mind. These are no excellere in real sense.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009 3:43PM
Ha brilliant all this discussion. That's art for you no one person looks at it in exactly the same way, but that's fine. After all it is only art!
Thursday, December 31, 2009 8:00PM
suck a fat one, art
Tuesday, January 12, 2010 8:08AM
I've worked in the LA county museum of art and also studied art.
Its a shame that none of Dali, Monet or Boudins paintings are amongst the top 15.
As far as the price goes its a bit outrageous, however some ones trash its another mens treasure.