Kent's Thesis

I must admit – I love my students. I try not to let people know that. But it’s true. How could you not love them when they send you messages like this?

Subject: Van Gogh...

Wait, the apparent jump in value from an initial item to another in 'trading up' does not require irrationality. I feel like it's evidence for a great deal of relativistic weight to valuing, and that it's sort of just another example of supply and demand. For example, being able to trade from a paperclip to a house does not show that people do not act in the most economically rational ways. Rather it shows that at some time a chain of circumstances has existed such that over that span of time a particular paperclip was equal in value to a particular house. This can work in perfectly rational ways. If we attach relativized values to each item through the trade, we can show how each item is truly equal in value, so that no net (relativized) value is lost from beginning to end.

And, it seems that the decision-making processes that resulted in everyone's evaluation of each item could itself involve totally rational concerns and decisions - (i.e., I have a second house I don't need/want, it will take a lot of work and energy to sell it under normal circumstances, I don't want to pay taxes or for upkeep another year, and I want a used car...you have a used car that you don't need, and you don't want to deal with selling it and paying the taxes, you want a house in the country, etc...we are in an interesting position, where the ideal market value for our possessions is quite different from their actual, real-time value. Basically, in trading we both can end up in a better position than we were beforehand. Even though my cool house seems worth more than your dumb old car, when we take in all the real-world costs and benefits at the time (take in more data), we can trade and both trade up). So the incredible thing is just how disparate people's evaluations of various things (concrete or not) can be.

That is from Kent Ford, a former student who is now…hmmm…Kent, what the hell are you doing? Last I heard you were in New Orleans with plans to sail somewhere exotic. Whatever it is, I hope you are using that mind of yours.

I will call the following Kent’s Thesis:

The process of trading up from a red paperclip to a house need not involve any irrationality.

I think Kent is right -- it need not involve irrationality. But I also think that it in fact did. I will try to explain why in my next post.

Until then, let me tell my former students – I know some of you are reading this – if you want to trade a painting for Ode To Life, god damn it, let me know!

Hmmmm...

What is it about crazy?

Jean Clee is, I am pretty sure, a bit looped.

I wouldn’t normally say such a thing. I know she will read this. But there it is – she’s a bit looped.

Nonetheless, I’m beginning to like her. A lot.

She traded Boo’s Ode to Life for my Kelly Lambert original. Now she wants to trade another of Boo’s painting for Ode to Life.

Why?

I’m not sure. Why and crazy don’t get along very well. So I don’t know what her motives are. And that makes me a bit nervous.

I know this trading up to a Van Gogh thing is already a bit of a weird venture. So maybe I shouldn’t be too concerned that suddenly the only interest I am getting is from a woman I don’t know who claims to have paintings from an artist no one has heard of. But it is all a bit odd.

With that said, the painting she wants to trade is pretty awesome. Indeed, I would say it is close to a masterpiece.

So should I trade?

I don’t know. I don’t even know if Boo ever existed. For all I know, Jean Clee stole these paintings.

What to do? What to do?

I know! I will ask the universe for help. If the universe hasn’t responded in two weeks, I will trade Jean Clee for another of Boo’s paintings.

Universe:

I want someone besides Jean Clee to trade me for Boo’s Ode to Life.
I want someone besides Jean Clee to trade me for Boo’s Ode to Life.
I want someone besides Jean Clee to trade me for Boo’s Ode to Life.

There. I feel much better. And optimistic.

It’s funny how therapeutic it is to ask for what you want.

Ode To Life

The universe works in mysterious ways. I have made a trade.

The painting is called Ode To Life. I received it from an art collector, Jean Clee, who in her own words ‘travels all over the world looking for neglected works of brilliance.’

The artist, according to Madame Clee, emigrated to the United States from Czechosolovokia in the early 80’s and has recently died of AIDS. Madame Clee purchased all his work prior to his death and has offered to trade me this painting for the Kellie Lambert original.

The artist’s name, believe it or not, is ‘Boo’. Though you might think that someone with the name ‘Boo’ would have made a mark in his lifetime, Boo is apparently totally unknown in the art world.

The painting is the replication of part of a huge painting that appeared on the wall of the New York MOMA. The original was painted by Kara Walker and is called Gone: An Historical Romance of a Civil War as It Occurred b’tween the Dusky Thighs of One Young Negress and her Heart. Walker’s painting is, to be sure, a masterpiece.

So this painting is in some sense utterly post-modern. It is derivative upon a huge painting that was painted for the MOMA.

And yet, despite its post-modernity, indeed perhaps because of it, this painting is rather incredible.

The subject matter is shocking: what looks like a girl giving a blowjob to what looks like a boy who stands with his hands outstretched in a moment of joy.

And the color is striking too. The original is entirely black and white. But this one has shades of blue that both suggest and betray the forgotten innocence of the boy and girl. I am not sure how the artist did it, but the color demands attention.

So both the subject matter and the color transfix the viewer.

It is perhaps for these reasons that Madame Clee told me: Few have the eye to see just how brilliant this painting is. Plagiarism be damned!

So there you have it -- my latest painting. It is from an obscure artist who copied part of a painting that appears in the MOMA; and a self-proclaimed art collector traded it to me for Kellie Lambert’s original.

So did I trade up? Who the fuck knows?

But I couldn’t be more pleased. I love this painting.

If anyone wants to trade for Ode to Life, let me know.

To Be (Rational) Or Not To Be (Rational)

I did not expect to be in this position. I’ve had a number of offers to trade. And I haven’t accepted any of them.

I can’t give any particularly rational reason for my refusal to trade. It boils down to the fact that I really like Kellie Lambert’s painting and haven’t been offered a painting that I like better than it.

My current stinginess, however, has made me wonder about rationality.

As I’ve said in previous posts, the whole process of trading up must involve a good deal of irrational behavior. And I’ve speculated that perhaps the predictable irrationality of people is what makes trading up possible.

But I now am wondering whether it would make sense to reintroduce the lottery idea into this scheme. Just as a refresher, I had toyed with the idea of giving anyone who traded with me the right to enter into a lottery for the Van Gogh at half of what the price of a lottery ticket would be worth. People could then either sell their right or enter the lottery at a highly discounter price.

Were there to be a lottery of this sort, half of the irrationality in the trading process would be eliminated. With a lottery in place those who traded with me would collectively lose half the value of Van Gogh. But losing half the value of a Van Gogh is less irrational than losing its full value.

So should I or shouldn’t I try to inject this process with a little more rationality?

I am inclined to think that I shouldn’t. Despite the fact that I am partial to rationality – I have studied way too much Aristotle not to be – a brief look at the world would convince most anyone that irrationality reigns. Consider politics. Repeatedly shouting slogans, it would seem, is far more effective than calm rational deliberation.

Nonetheless, I am open to the potential power of rationality. So I have decided to make a decision based upon my next trade. If the person who trades with me would be willing to trade a significantly better painting if a lottery is involved, then I will go with a lottery. If not, then I won’t.

And since I am so concerned with rationality, I want to take this opportunity to tell the universe:

I want to trade my original Kellie Lambert for a significantly valuable painting.
I want to trade my original Kellie Lambert for a significantly valuable painting.
I want to trade my original Kellie Lambert for a significantly valuable painting.

Anyone who wants to trade, let me know.

Van Gogh's Prostitutes

It is easy to turn someone into a saint, especially someone as brilliant and tragic as Van Gogh.

In fact, I am guilty of doing just that. When I think about Van Gogh, I can almost see a halo above his head. I form an image of a man who nobly pursued beauty in its purest form, a man with an untainted soul who was too good for this world, a man whose unrivalled artistic sensibilities led him to an act of tragic self-harm.

But was Van Gogh a saint?

That of course is a tricky question. But it is clear from his letters that he engaged in behavior that we typically don’t associate with saints.

After falling in love with two women who did not reciprocate his feelings, Van Gogh ended up living with a low class prostitute named Sien.

The following are three sentences taken from three of Van Gogh’s letters.

Van Gogh’s Prostitutes

And I tell you frankly that in my opinion one must not hesitate to go to a prostitute occasionally if there is one you can trust and feel something for, as there really are many.

I am reading the last part of Les Misérables; the figure of Fantine, a prostitute, made a deep impression on me...

To explain my meaning more clearly, let me begin by saying that even his most beautiful weeping Magdalenes or Mater Dolorosas always simply remind me of the tears of a beautiful prostitute who has caught a venereal disease or some such small misery of human life.

So maybe Van Gogh wasn’t so saintly after all.

But then again, maybe there is nothing un-saintly about frequenting prostitutes. Indeed, some have speculated that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute.

So maybe we are all too Victorian in our moral sensibilities.

The Catholic Church requires a saint to have performed three miracles. But I don’t see why the Catholic Church should have the final word on this matter. I will therefore articulate the following thesis. I will call it the Ho-Ho-Ho thesis.

Ho-Ho-Ho Thesis: Any saint must sleep with a prostitute at least three times.

See, I am doing it again. I can ‘t help but think of Van Gogh as a saint. And I will do just about anything to continue to do so.

Kellie Lambert's Dream

In Kellie Lambert’s Dickinson period, her paintings were a surrealistic and symbolic montage. It is not, however, the surrealism of Dali. No, it is a surrealism that harkens back to Emily Dickinson.

In this painting two birds float in the foreground. One is black and dominant; the other, pink and submissive. I can’t help but suspect that the birds are related. Perhaps they are sisters. The older sister, I think, is the bolder darker one.

Above the birds to the right is a tree house. The tree that holds the tree house descends into a series of logs under which peak out two barely noticeable feet that belong to a little girl. The feet perhaps represent the buried desires that exist in their most innocent form in the tree houses of children.

Above the birds to the left is a pale window. All windows point both outside and inside. The window in this painting would seem to be pointing primarily inside – it is giving us a glimpse of someone’s inner being. Nonetheless, the window makes one feel as if one can see beyond it to the outside. It thus in a peculiar way gives both perspectives.

In the lower left corner sits a black figure. Although it is on the same level as the child’s feet, as a result of the bright color surrounding it the figure visually feels like the lowest part of the painting. Perhaps it represents death, that permanent inhabitant of all our deepest feelings.

There is much more to say about this painting. It has a peculiar geometry. The colors are almost painful. And much, much more.

Come Slowly, Eden! What is Kellie saying? I feel as if she is trying to say something. But then again, perhaps not. Dreams are like that.

It is a remarkable painting.

Anyone who wants to trade, let me know.

I Didn't Do It!

I wish I had. But I didn’t.

Over the weekend thieves stole a Van Gogh painting called ‘Poppy Flowers’ from a museum in Cairo. The painting is worth $50 million.

http://www.theimproper.com/art/?p=228

As I said, I didn’t commit the crime. But I understand the impulse. The thieves probably wanted a Van Gogh to hang on their wall, just like I do.

Although the criminals probably don’t read my blog, I want them to know that I understand their desire. And since I feel such a close bond with them, I also want them to know that I am willing to help them out.

Since they probably need some place to store the painting, if they want to trade their Van Gogh for my Kellie Lambert original, I would be more than willing hang Poppy Flowers on my wall while the manhunt subsides.

So, Van Gogh thieves – if you’re listening, and if you want to trade your Van Gogh for my awesome Kellie Lambert original, let me know.

And anyone else with a Van Gogh, (or any other cool painting), if you want to trade for my Kellie Lambert original, let me know.