Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Edvard Munch - "The Scream" 1893 - Could We Have Produced That?
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
Okay folks, time to treat you to another of Adele's muses (of which there are many). I was having a frustrating day and I put my hands over my ears and silently screamed - "Oh" I thought "I could paint that"..... Such a simple painting, I think most of us could have done that. So what makes such a painting so successful and worth £multi-millions? This is what I call "funny money" meaning that to me it is entirely unjustified. Okay, calm down - you know what I mean. Now I am not singling Munch out when I say this because I feel that however wonderful a painting is, to me it is not worth mult-millions. Having said that, to be honest, if someone approached me and told me they would pay millions for one of my paintings, I am never going to refuse! What do other artists think.
Posted
Well... yes, basically.
Most of the million $$££ paintings are after the painter's death; most are by art elites who have more money then brains (even £10 qualifies for that!)
How about a similar question, same vein - "What makes 'the Scream' valuable to anyone?" "Why Van Gogh?" - in both cases there have been equally as good abstracts and imaginative works of art.
I'm not doing the "bad grapes" thing - I don't care what sells and what doesn't - I just TRULY don't see £millions in pretty much any of these "valuable" artworks.
Posted
"The Scream" is iconic. It has passed out of the world of Art and into the world of popular culture. It means something to people. It is recognisable.
That is its value. None of Munch's other works come close. It's almost as if he was a one hit wonder, like a pop star with one successful single.
Posted
I understand what you are saying Amanda about the term Iconic, but to me I must admit I have an issue with it. The mushroom cloud over the city of Hyroshima was what i call truly iconic it changed the world forever as we knew it for good or bad, but no one would pay the silly money for a painting of it that they paid for the Scream
Posted
Meh... I wouldn't urinate on a footballer if he were on fire... let them buuuuurn! Self-obsessed &&**&^^&*&soles..
I'm thoroughly sick and tired of the holier than thou effect with sportie types.
We have a road near here - it was potholed, drivable but a little rough. People along it were trying to get it fixed for years - the council kept saying "we have no money for minor roads" (they have 20 mill for a new sports complex and 50 mill for their own new offices!)
Then, suddenly, the road was closed and potholes fixed.... why?
Becasue two weeks later there was a leg of a UK wide bicycle race going through that section!
Sports-people can molest, rape, speed, steal, etc... and very very little gets done to them, a slap on the wrist... a 2 match ban and a £1000 club-imposed fine (Why the hell is the club enacting fines for breaking the law!?)
So... NO.. I would step over the fallen body of a sporty type rather than offer a helping hand!
Edited
by DippyDipper