A Danish artist has been ordered to return nearly 500,000 kroner (€67,000) to a museum after he supplied it with two blank canvasses for a project he named “Take the Money and Run”.
A Danish artist has been ordered to return nearly 500,000 kroner (€67,000) to a museum after he supplied it with two blank canvasses for a project he named “Take the Money and Run”.
I think the problem is this: the man was paid for his work. People don't seem to get that.
The deal was that he was paid an amount of money to make an art piece. That art piece was supposed to use another bunch of money as props. He was supposed to then give back the prop money after the exhibition was over.
When he made his work that used none of the money, that was fine. The museum rolled with it and gave him his dues. They didn't even ask for the prop money back when they realised he wasn't using it.
The problem is that he's now supposed to return the prop money that was to be used in the artwork, and he's refusing to.
He's already been paid, he's just being a shit to an organisation offering a public service.
He should pay them back in prop money.
Hell yeah! Let's fuck over museums, you know… those big evil corporations that house art and culture for society. Many are even nonprofits and help fund art projects and provide resources for creativity to underprivileged schools. Gross!
You do know the whole thing is probably increasing visibility of the museum and could be leveraged for more funding/donations than it would have received from just having typical artwork.
Sometimes the art is the story. Actually, most of the time the art is the story of how it was made.
Key word is probably.
The only story here is a artist who stole money. I'm not arguing over being paid to make art and providing a blank canvas. I'm referring to the money that is supposed to be returned at the end of the contract.
That was the prop money. I guess if they'd known he'd steal it, they would've used fake prop money instead.
I should have said Monopoly money!