• An_Ugly_Bastard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    The artist named it “Take the Money and Run.” The museum should change it to “Get your Money Back and Laugh.”

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If this stunt generated far more publicity and/or patrons than an actual painting, couldn't the "artist" argue they fulfilled their end of the deal?

      I wouldn't be surprised if some rich idiot pays a large amount of money for it, like that Banksy painting that sold for 20x after self-destructing.

      • An_Ugly_Bastard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        First, Banksey actually creates art. Second, This stunt generated 0 patrons. The person who does marketing for the museum generated publicity and patrons for bringing this to the medias attention. Without that, people would wonder why there was a blank canvas there.