Andy Warhol Paints Debbie Harry on an Amiga

sorry to bump an old post but this just made me think.

Art is subjecitve. The only way to judge how good it is is by seeing what people feel about it.
If they feel it deserves their money, then I guess it's pretty good.

So does commercial success define what's good art? mmm what a strange conclusion. Of course since it's in the context of a certain epoch, this success varies in time. While the artist should be evaluated on his own time, the piece doesn't have to.

I'll have to think about this

wow i can do that. why am i not getting payed big bucks?

What a hack Andy is people are stupid and gullible to think what he did was art. All he was, was a weird flaming H**o and that's all he ever should have been

Why are we all getting worked up about it???

ANDY WARHOL DID IT.

What an AMAZING artist! I mean, he took soup cans, and had the breakthrough idea of making that art. He's an original of Jeff Koons that takes inflatable toys, and then has people copy them in aluminium and sells them for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Watch Art School Confidential. He kind of nailed it on the head. Art is a reflection of society, and our society, is very superficial.

If you read the other comments (like a page back) my comment would be more relevant. I said that baced on the comments previous. One more thing I Never said that I didn't like him or his art. Did you even read all the comment? Personaly I like his art.