Museum Associates/Agence France-Presse - Getty Images
Speaking of prettiness, the purchaser's money comes from cosmetics.
Actually, the purchase and the price make a lot of sense. The buyer, Ronald S. Lauder, is the founder of the Neue Galerie, "a tiny museum at Fifth Avenue and 86th Street devoted entirely to German and Austrian fine and decorative arts." The painting exactly fits the place and is one of the artist's greatest paintings. Lauder had to convince the owner to sell. And the owner, the niece of the woman in the portrait (Adele Bloch-Bauer), fought a long and hard to obtain the painting from the Austrian government, which, she successfully argued, had obtained it by way of the Nazis.
Posts
16 comments:
I saw pictures of it in art history classes. It's pretty, but worth $135 million? I'm no that impressed.
I wonder by how much the stolen-by-Nazi history upped its worth?
It has a story... That adds depth to something that is stunningly superficial
The Mona Lisa it ain't.
Not remotely to my taste, but another cool thing I learned from Ann Althouse without having to endow her university (much less register!)
Good on Maria Altmann for regaining the painting. The story does indeed elevate it, though I'm tempted to think only a lawyer could truly appreciate such a story. [No, no, not a shot at lawyers because of the Nazi angle; a shot at lawyers for the complexity]
-wolfe
Yes, I was blanking on the word 'provenance' when I commented at 9:09. Thanks for filling it in. We tried to get into ARS when they stopped in Madison, but failed to get tickets. This was several years ago.
It's the smile, Dave. And no, I supposed dentist's wouldn't agree with me. Too bad.
-Wolfe
ugh. 'suppose' and 'dentists'. Bleh I need more tea.
-wolfe
Leah: I agree. I absolutely love that Lauder has a gemlike museum and paid what he needed to for this painting which will do so well there. I love the art museums on the Upper East Side. I'd do a trip to New York just to go to them all and, especially, to see this painting.
It breaks my heart to think that if Klimt had lived only a few more years, he could have finished his transition to black velvet.
Althouse said:
"It has a story... That adds depth to something that is stunningly superficial."
The apparent superficial prettiness is purposeful. Klimt's work expresses a theme common to many artists and thinkers in belle-epoque Vienna: a polished surface barely masking neurotic turmoil beneath. The context of this piece is Freud, Mahler, Hofmannsthal, and Wittgenstein.
I wouldn't buy a print of it for $10 to grace my wall.
It's ugly to me and would probably clash with our other decor.
I'm not a fan of gold as I usually find it to be quite gaudy.
But this painting - Wow! Stunning.
would probably clash with our other decor.
This puts me in mind of the clash between the characters played by Max Von Sydow (a painter) and Daniel Stern (a wealthy rock star looking to decorate his places in the Hamptons) in "Hannah and Her Sisters."
"the clash between the characters played by Max Von Sydow (a painter) and Daniel Stern (a wealthy rock star looking to decorate his places in the Hamptons)"
Perfect!
"The context of this piece is Freud, Mahler, Hoffmannsthal and Wittgenstein."
Tj, in you search for context, how could you have possibly overlooked Fritz, the bartender at Der Stein?
Alaska Jack:
"Tj, in you search for context, how could you have possibly overlooked Fritz, the bartender at Der Stein?"
For the answer to that one, you'll have to check with Carl Schorske, author of "Fin de Siecle Vienna: Politics and Culture," who initially made these comparisons. I don't think old Carl was much of a drinker, though.
Post a Comment