From The Sublime To The Ridiculous

Once in a blue moon, a blogpost just writes itself. I was returning home after working abroad for a week. The trip started very badly when I found that the Gatwick Express was closed the day I was travelling. After a trains, planes and automobiles journey which took three hours, I rocked up to the check-in desk and realised that I had left my passport at home. I nearly passed out. I’ve been travelling by myself since I was 14; I have never forgotten my passport, not once. The last few weeks have been so stressful, I’m surprised I didn’t even forget I was going away in entirety. Fortunately they accepted my driving licence as Photo ID.

While I’ve been away, I’ve been reading a book on cosmology and universe-creation theories (don’t worry, I didn’t understand most of it. This will be a brainiac-free zone today 😉 ) . So, I’m on the train back into London, and one of the quotes in the book really resonated with me. The mathematician Paul Dirac said it’s of greater importance to have beauty in one’s equations than to have them fit experiment, his point being that the cosmos is so intricately and beautifully designed, an elegant mathematical solution even if not entirely resolved, is more likely to lead you in the right direction than an ‘ugly’ equation. I personally believe this is true; even the most cursory glance at the fundamental laws reveals their sheer elegance.

Anyway, I had to switch trains at Clapham Junction and it was so noisy, I couldn’t concentrate. I started looking at my emails instead and found one from Boca do Lobo about the most ridiculous paintings sold for millions. The examples are shown above. In order, the Gerhard Richter was $1.1 million, the Barnett Newman was $43 million, the Rothko was $72 million and the Jackson Pollock cost $161 million. Now is it just me? That gave me a terrific laugh. I guess a fool and his money are welcome at Sotheby’s and Christie’s. Talk about the emperor’s new cloak. It made me think though; is the art bad in itself, or is it the price that is a problem? I quite like a some of the work by Pollock and I’m a huge Richter fan. In the same way, I feel I can relate to Rothko’s use of colour because it almost seems to be a litmus-test for his mood. Those prices are mental though. Like Cocaine, buying high-end art is God’s way of telling you that you have too much money.

My personal favourite is Cy Twombly. No one can convince me that his work isn’t some Marcel Duchampesque in-joke. Here are some examples. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you his work is mostly ‘untitled’.

Don’t tell me he’s not taking the Michael. His work never fails to cheer me up; he was a hoot. The first one sold for $70 million by the way. I leave you with some paintings for comparison, and I hope you experience some life-enhancing beauty this week, scientific, artistic, divine or even human. Pip pip.

(paintings: Gerhard Richter; Guido Reni; Loyiso Mkize; Giorgio de Chirico)