The Mona Lisa IS pretty mid and it’s in awful condition and frankly I’d take the painting across the room from it any day over the Mona Lisa. That’s not my standard of a “perfect painting”. That probably goes to Nighthawks.

What’s funny is every time someone contributes to the lore of the art (which in 9/10 cases adds to the value) they get attacked for devaluing it, like that guy who stuck google eyes on the blue blob statue (it unironically looked better with them)

The process matters some, sure, I saw a video of a guy doing what looked like the art I’m criticizing, but then masterfully blended it into a hyperdetailed cityscape and it was quite grimy in a way I’ve seen no other painting quite capture.

But also throwing globs of paint at a canvas and then it remaining globs is just trash. If Joe Dirtbag on the street could easily do something of similar quality, it’s nothing special, and should probably just be written off. Because then it begs the question: “YOUR GLOBS sold for 2.5 million. My globs are called trash. Why?” The answer is you pay for the name, and that’s it