This week we spent time at the contemporary art museum, The Broad, in the Art District in Downtown Los Angeles. The museum is named after Eli and Edythe Broad, who are actually one of the only businessmen to build more than one Fortune 500 companies in two different fields of work. The Broads focus their efforts toward philanthropy and art. I was able to explore and analyze the art with the company of my Professor, Glenn Zucman, and my classmate, Lisa. We saw art from work from numerous artists like: Sam Francis, Roy Lichtenstein, Andy Warhol, Ellsworth Kelly, Susan Rothenberg, Jeff Koons, Sherrie Levine and Takashi Murakami.
We started with Takashi and after few questions about the medium, Professor Zucman googled photos of his work and this photo pops up on his screen. It is a photo showing the process of how Murakami’s is created, with the help of assistants. How is this allowed? I wonder. Should an artist be expected to do his own work? David Hockney publicly questions the authenticity of artist, Damien Hirst, at the Royal Academy in London by posting a sign next to his own work that read “All the works here were made by the artist himself, personally”. As insulting as the sign that Hockey put on display was, this was not the first scenario that Hirst’s work has been criticized.
This is the definition of a gray area because who is to say that art is limited to one artist. Art can created any way, with any medium and however many people it takes. Then there is this sleazy side that gives that impression that the priority is to. make easy money. But can the pieces created with the help of assistance do the same job as a piece created by a sole artist?Learning that some artists don’t even see the work until it is hanging in the gallery takes away from the genuinity of the art but it has been going on for hundreds of years with artists such as Michelangelo, then, or Koons, now. I do understand the other side to the argument but do not necessarily agree. What do you think? Leave your opinion in the comments below!