How’s Hunter Biden’s art show, where the spanking new self-taught “artist” and son of the president, miraculously expected to sell his masterpieces at $500,000 a pop? The show is coming in October.
According to the White House, which crafted a ‘deal’ to ensure that Hunter himself will have no idea who is buying his paintings as an “ethics” measure, everything’s on the up and up.
But according to the Village Sun, a Manhattan publication, an artist in the vicinity had his own opinion about the matter:
Within an hour of Psaki’s press conference, [artist and filmmaker Rod] Webber, who lives in Boston, entered the Georges Bergès Gallery, at 462 West Broadway. Hunter Biden’s artwork is not on view there currently. But an exhibit of 15 of his paintings — his first art exhibit ever — is slated to open there in October.
In this case, Webber admitted that he had also caught wind of the gallery show from coverage in the Washington Post and some tips from friends in the New York media.
Wearing paint-splattered jeans, Webber stealthily strode to a wall, whipped out a spray can and started to write “Daddy” on it in pink letters. He intended to spell out “Daddy War Crimes,” a take on Daddy Warbucks of “Little Orphan Annie” fame.
After that, the guard tackled him and called the cops.
Now, this guy is obviously a nut. He says he’s a far-leftist, apparently the kind of guy who thinks Bernie Sanders is too conservative, and in the comical piece, says he’s been arrested before for his performance art stunts, but always gets the charges dropped because he plays his own lawyer in court and courts don’t “want to deal with me.” Which has a ring of truth.
But he’s obviously got his fingers on the pulse of something, as such street artists often do, and isn’t the only guy out there doing this kind of artistic truth-telling. His art is in the same spirit as Banksy, and even more specifically Sabo, the latter a street artist who makes a high impact in Los Angeles by exposing left-wing piousness in his “alterations” of public billboards, to great merriment on the right, and probably people like Webber, too. That’s an actual art movement for this age, as out-there as it appears. They’re always ‘out there’ when they’re making an impact.
And it doesn’t even matter that the guard tackled him before he got his spraying done (D-A-D-D-Y is just perfect, he didn’t need the rest of the message actually) and probably painted over the message. The film is made. The performance art is done. The word is out.
What’s more, it’s unlikely that this ‘performance art’ is just one man’s opinion, either. Artists of this type work in a milieu of artists and what they do reflects a common perspective. To think that a starving performance artist and film-maker like Webber and his pals wouldn’t be disgusted and even jealous to see neophyte Hunter Biden come along and scarf up $500,000 for his blow-pipe paintings, all because of his somehow new-found amazing once-in-a-lifetime artistic talent, while they’ve been toiling for years living hand to mouth, is kind of … understandable.
What’s more, the art critics are starting to weigh in on Hunter’s new clothes act, too, real ones with art-world influence, and it’s pretty much the same opinion:
According to Matt Margolis at PJ Media:
But, seriously, how can we be sure that Hunter Biden’s artwork is worth what it’s said to be? Well, I’m no professional art critic, but Sebastian Smee is. He is a Pulitzer Prize-winning art critic for the Washington Post, and he says Hunter’s paintings aren’t all that great.
In an interview with CNN’s Chris Cillizza, Smee was asked outright: “Is Hunter Biden’s work any good, aesthetically speaking?”
“For me, not really,” Smee told him. “I’ve only seen it in reproduction, so I’m sure I’m missing a lot: texture, layering, detail. Parts of them look technically impressive. But the style is eclectic in a way that makes his work feel neither one thing nor another.”
“Most great artists, whatever style of art they make, have been trying to make art all their lives,” Smee added. “They are fully devoted to what they do. To me, Biden seems a bit of a dabbler.”
Smee assessed that the art seems to serve no purpose other than as a therapeutic exercise but insists that “if I were a museum curator, I would struggle to find compelling reasons to share it with the public.”
That’s brutal stuff, done in full art-world language that the art world goes by. Smee, too, has let the cat out of the bag about the merits of Hunter Biden’s so-called art, which rather shows that the art world in various places is not really fooled about the claims to merit about Hunter Biden’s paintings.
Whoever cooked up this obvious money-laundering scheme for Hunter — to sell paintings billed as “art” and take in big-dollar amounts not subject to public scrutiny, possibly for “the Big Guy” as Hunter’s abandoned computer laptop revealed, obviously thought the art world was easily fooled and would buy into anything declared to be “art” by some China-linked gallery owner in Manhattan. The big-dollar prices were obviously something they’d read about in the news, yet they had little understanding about how rare those kinds of prices were, especially for a neophyte.
Now nobody seems to be fooled, and although all of these people are left-wing, it’s pretty obvious that a few important ones are starting to become the little kids who call out the emperor for being naked, not wearing clothes that only the most refined supposedly can see.
The Hunter art scheme is nonsense. It’s a big money-funnel, from a guy with a history of influence-peddling for his dad in various other previous projects. Now he’s trying it again, and the locals are starting to see right through it, which makes one wonder how long this is going to go on. Like the Clinton Foundation’s donations, expect to see the prices of Hunter’s little gig fall like a stone once Joe is out of office. They might even fall before it, now that Hunter is becoming an art-world laughingstock.