Today I'll be quoted in the National Post talking about obesity rates and likely some relationship will be drawn to the incredible indirect and direct health care expenditures attached to it.
Well today I've got a more positive spin on how obesity helped one man hit an incredible payday.
Tuesday night Christie's auction house sold a painting by Lucien Freud entitled, "Benefits Supervisor Sleeping".
According to CNN, The painting was painted over a period of 9 months back in 1995 and it's of Ms. Sue Tilley, a British governmental benefits manager.
With the sale Freud gained the honour of his painting selling for the highest dollar value of any painting ever painted by a living artist.
His obese payday?
$33.6 million dollars.
That's $3.73 million a month or $124,000 per day for the 9 months he spent painting it.
Unfortunately Ms. Tilley didn't get paid quite as well - she took home a comparatively anorexic $51/day.
[Hat tip goes out to my mom]
UPDATE: I received a phone call today from someone who felt this post was offensive to folks with weight to lose.
Frankly I don't see it.
I definitely don't understand art, that I'll readily admit and I can't fathom how any painting of anything is worth 33.6 million dollars.
I think it's a great painting and wonderful that the model wasn't self-conscious about her weight as frankly body image need not be tied into weight, but the post was really meant to highlight the tremendous value that society has placed on weight as evidenced by the incredible dollars spent on a portrait of an obese woman lounging on a sofa.
Anyhow, if anyone else was upset by this post feel free to let me know in the comments.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Obesity Allows Artist to Hit the Jackpot
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I probably have a similar body to the woman in the painting and think it is beautiful. Your post was not offensive - you could have rudely discussed the subject of the painting, but did not.
I agree with your point - with such an emphasis in our society placed on THIN at all costs, it is a fascinating juxtaposition that this painting fetched such a tremendous price.
Hi there. I called your office directly with the comment because I didn't feel comfortable engaging my physician online, but am happy to be invited to do so here.
To clarify, I like the painting, I am pleased to encounter it. I appreciate its beauty and the artist's thought. I appreciate its challenge of our perceptions of form. That woman is tired after a long day of work supervising government benefits payments. :) I've been there.
The reason I felt offended, and as I mentioned in the message I left, is hard for me to pinpoint. It certainly wasn't the image, or the amount of money someone paid for it.
As I said in the message, I would never think it was deliberate intention. Your blog is stimulating and eye-opening.
Even after further thought, though, there is indeed something that still sits wrong with me - centred around the words "obesity allows artist to hit the jackpot" and mention of "his obese payday". It felt like a low blow.
The artist probably never guessed his work would fetch such a price some day. It's what the market will bear. This high sale price is linked to, perhaps, I hope, an emerging understanding and value placed on all form. Linked to an idea.
By highlighting the words "obese" I felt that there was judgement implied. What if, for example, the figure was without a limb, or abnormally twisted, or severely burned, or beautiful? Would it then be a (insert word) payday? Would Van Gogh's Irises be a $49 million jackpot for the chain garden warehouses?
Thousands of commercial, for-profit (not that that is a bad word) entities are making scads more money on a fixation with changing form. The U.S. weight loss market was worth $46.3 Billion in 2004 and forecast to reach $61 Billion by 2008. http://www.naturalnews.com/006133.html. The focus for most is on reducing, not on healthy living, activity and good eating.
Other commercial and non-profit groups are making money as well - Dove is selling soap with its campaign on beauty, professional (dietitians) organizations are relying on commercial funding as government and other funding streams dwindle.
In this, in my opinion, obesity didn't allow the artist to hit the jackpot. An idea that has come into its own did. I hope.
Thank you for the opportunity to clarify. I'm just making my way into these things... I promise I won't be as long-winded next time.
And now I am off for a pleasant walk on this sweet-smelling evening!
Thanks for the thoughtful comments!
Fascinating too as I think it's safe to say that the discomfort felt by the second commenter stemmed from my use of the word "obese" as an adjective.
I think that just goes to show just how charged the word is and how much judgment rides with it.
I certainly don't consider the word "obese" to be judgmental, but rather a descriptor. Unfortunately the same can't be said to be true of society.
I wonder had I used the word "inflated" in the post's body and simply reworded the title to read "Artist makes millions from painting of obese nude", I suspect there would have been less upset?
Makes me think of Tom Wadden's article, "What's in a name" where he showed that in fact the term obese was not an appropriate one to use in the office as due to its usage in society, it held negative connotations.
The artist did not hit the "obesity jackpot" as you would have us believe. Lucien Freud (relative of Sigmund Freud) sold his work through a gallery around the time that he painted it. A collector bought it, held it, and put it up for auction. The collector hit the jackpot. This is how the system works when it comes to investing in art.
As someone who studied figurative art, many of our models were obese. If a student so much as snickered, they would have been thrown out of the class. We treated our models with dignity and appreciation. Well done, Anonymous. When it comes to laying down colored mud, LF certainly has chops.
Post a Comment