Thread: Is it worth it?

So, they just auctioned off that painting-"The Scream" for 120 million. Other than the obvious comment that some folks have too much money the question to ponder is what makes something worth it's cost? Does it have to have some kind of intrinsic value or can some market just set the value. If you buy the Hope Diamond the value will never decrease because of its rarity but if they discover 3 more of these paintings besides the other two what happens to the value? Does the fact people are willing to pay mean it's worth the price? What happens if the market values something for X amount but no one is willing to pay it?

This not only applies to this particular painting but really anything else from an expensive watch to a fancy automobile to a house or bottle of wine or of course a razor.

When it comes to art its rarely (if ever) about worth and all about the fact that its a "one off"

If its a production item like a car or watch, I've found its usually about bragging rights.

Its hard for someone that does not have a billion dollars to understand how you can spend $120 million on a painting, but then again a third world family in poverty can't comprehend that we would spend $100 on a razor.

Economies of scale.

To answer your question, yes, I believe that a thing is "worth" whatever someone is willing to pay at the moment. Not sure if you're the appropriate age but do you recall people paying $10 for a pebble because someone called it a pet rock?

I would say that is worth it, if the buyer thinks so. I mean this sincerely; I'm not trying to be glib.
Cheers,
Jeff

Originally Posted by joebehar

When it comes to art its rarely (if ever) about worth and all about the fact that its a "one off"

If its a production item like a car or watch, I've found its usually about bragging rights.

Its hard for someone that does not have a billion dollars to understand how you can spend $120 million on a painting, but then again a third world family in poverty can't comprehend that we would spend $100 on a razor.

Economies of scale.

To answer your question, yes, I believe that a thing is "worth" whatever someone is willing to pay at the moment. Not sure if you're the appropriate age but do you recall people paying $10 for a pebble because someone called it a pet rock?

"The scream" actually is not one of a kind , there is actually four versions in different media!!

Right Martin, in this case there is actually 4 versions of the Scream.
2 of them are oil-paintings, and two, including the one that sold the other day, are in water color.

The one that sold was the only one of them that will ever hit the open market though.
The 3 others are all in 2 different institutions here in Norway and will not be sold.
State and county owned, bound by the testament of the giver.

The obvious comment referred to in the OP is an interesting one when it comes to stuff like this.
What exactly is too much money?
Is it like in some religions where never owning more than seven things that is the baseline?
What is excessive spending when it comes to, oh, a car?
Does the too much kick in right around the Ford mark?
A trabant might be enough?
Surely, a BMW must fit the bill?
I've never really gotten that comment.
Too much for one is a steal for others.
This painting is a very good example of exactly that.

What was the saying a gent said on TV about this? "You can always remake the money but you can never remake the original painting."

Not to mention the fact that the 4 part movie, loosely based on the painting, has total present net asset value of over $603 million.

Originally Posted by Martin103

"The scream" actually is not one of a kind , there is actually four versions in different media!!

Four "versions" Each of them one of a kind....I understand what you're trying to say, but the indisputable fact is, every painting is one of a kind. There may be others that are very similar, but that's where it ends.

I have not seen any of the versions in person, but I'm willing to wager a fine tub of premium shaving soap that each of them has its own "presence" and speaks to the viewer differently.

Originally Posted by joebehar

Four "versions" Each of them one of a kind....I understand what you're trying to say, but the indisputable fact is, every painting is one of a kind. There may be others that are very similar, but that's where it ends.

I have not seen any of the versions in person, but I'm willing to wager a fine tub of premium shaving soap that each of them has its own "presence" and speaks to the viewer differently.

Thats probably the case for sure, wondering if the 4 different version were done one after the other or what kind of time between all of them?
was it because of popularity? financial gain? family rendition?

Originally Posted by Martin103

Thats probably the case for sure, wondering if the 4 different version were done one after the other or what kind of time between all of them?
was it because of popularity? financial gain? family rendition?

As I understand it the 4 paintings are made within a time period of 17-18 years.
It was during a walk on a hill east of the centre of Oslo with two friends he got the inspiration for it.
The area in the background is basically the inner part of the Oslo harbour, where the new Opera house is situated now.
I have seen three out of the 4 in real life, and they are all distinct and unique due to the choice of colors and materials it was painted on and with.

A fun little story:
One of my very best mates when growing up on the east side of Oslo ended up as a small time criminal, and two of the many heists he pulled was stealing the version of The Scream that hangs in the National Gallery here in Oslo, and also The Vampire by the same artist.
I say small time because while he did some rather famous art-thefts he has still to even successfully steal as much as a bar of chocolate without getting caught eventually

The sad part is that the fella was a great sports talent and was offered a spot on one of the big football teams in our top-division...