A banana duct taped to wall.... for $120,000.00

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

made art with it.

If taping a banana to a wall counts as art then the word has lost all meaning. Imagine thinking a banana on a wall is art is just ludicrous.
If I throw shit at a wall and said it's worth $100,000 I'd hope I would be laughed at by everyone.

[Temp name]

If taping a banana to a wall counts as art then the word has lost all meaning. Imagine thinking a banana on a wall is art is just ludicrous.
If I throw shit at a wall and said it's worth $100,000 I'd hope I would be laughed at by everyone.

If you can convince others it's art, it's art.

[d00mGuArD]

It's a $120k art installation he just ruined.

Yes it *was* a banana, but then someone made art with it. Doesn't matter that it's ridiculous, the man still broke something worth 120k

No no no
The owner is expected to replace the banana... since it will eventually go rotten. The 120k were paid for the concept of owning it!!!

"All is not lost for the buyer, who, let’s face it, was going to have to deal with the demise of the banana at some point. The work apparently comes with a certificate of authenticity, and owners can replace the banana. “[Datuna] did not destroy the art work. The banana is the idea,” Lucien Terras, a director at the gallery, told the Miami Herald"

[Thekri]

They replaced the banana and now extra cops have been assigned to guard it...

... Perfect.

The first people I feel sorry for in this whole story. Imagine joining the police force, only to be assigned to guard a Banana taped to a wall.

[Twdft]

Imagine joining the police force, only to be assigned to guard a Banana taped to a wall.

Which isn't even necessary because eating the banana is obviously art itself. If I were that cop I'd get a truckload of donuts to eat while watching the banana, hoping someone buys the idea "cop eating a donut" for a 100k from me.

[Thekri]

Which isn't even necessary because eating the banana is obviously art itself. If I were that cop I'd get a truckload of donuts to eat while watching the banana, hoping someone buys the idea "cop eating a donut" for a 100k from me.

I wonder if stealing the banana also counts as art. You can interpret it as a counterculture movement against overpriced consumerism.

[Puupi]

It's a $120k art installation he just ruined.

Yes it *was* a banana, but then someone made art with it. Doesn't matter that it's ridiculous, the man still broke something worth 120k

It's only worth 120k if it was insured for 120k. Otherwise it's just a banana.

[Puupi]

Technically something is worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it...

But legally, no.

[KrayZ33]

Legally, as in: "in a court of law" (because the law has no say over the value of things on the market), it would follow what is vaguely described as "fair market value".

The fair market value in this instance could easily be determined by the purchasers showing that they paid $120k for it, while at the same time you could probably show that the average price for a banana is only 10 cents. There are a lot of ways that the price could be determined of this particular banana, and it could be anywhere between 10 cents and $120k. Arguments could be made that it was not just a banana, but an artwork. That it was part of the art exhibition etc. Under certain conditions the "fair market value" may also be disregarded, but then the court would need to give reasons as to why (emotional value, etc.)

No... just no.

This is "artwork" *designed* to be destroyed at some point. It's worth a banana.
It doesn't matter what silly reason you can come up with, no such arguments can be made for that "piece"

[KrayZ33]

I'm simply stating what is prescribed under american law.

Maybe.
Not in this case however.

[KrayZ33]

I'm sorry but that is bullshit.

You can make any argument you want, but that doesn't mean the law has to give them any thought.
Laws are "black and white" - that's what they are there for. The grey area does appear whenever the law isn't laid out well enough (yet)

If the U.S. is like that, (and I really doubt that) then you basically do not have any laws.

[Thekri]

Legally, as in: "in a court of law" (because the law has no say over the value of things on the market), it would follow what is vaguely described as "fair market value".

The fair market value in this instance could easily be determined by the purchasers showing that they paid $120k for it, while at the same time you could probably show that the average price for a banana is only 10 cents. There are a lot of ways that the price could be determined of this particular banana, and it could be anywhere between 10 cents and $120k. Arguments could be made that it was not just a banana, but an artwork. That it was part of the art exhibition etc. Under certain conditions the "fair market value" may also be disregarded, but then the court would need to give reasons as to why (emotional value, etc.)

In this case the perishable nature of the banana prevents the art object from having long term value, so regardless of the purchase price, the piece is understood to only have temporary value.

Pretty much any court would rule it has the value of a banana and 4 inches of duct tape. However additional damages could be assessed if it caused a reduction in visitors to the museum, or other damages secondary to the value of the art. There could also be criminal vandalism charges filed as well.

As far as the purchase price of the item, you can make an argument for the $120k price tag as being "Reasonable" when you look at it in terms of the attention it has generated. By putting such an absurd price on a banana, it generated a great deal of media attention, and thus prestige for the buyer. It is the same sort of flex when they sell Tuna for $30,000 a pound. However like the Tuna, its value wouldn't hold up in court, because it becomes worthless in a few days anyway.

[Flutterguy]

It was the artist's name attached to it that sold it, not the piece itself. It's really how modern art works. Some regular jack off can't nail a banana to a wall and ask for $120,000.

[Temp name]

No no no
The owner is expected to replace the banana... since it will eventually go rotten. The 120k were paid for the concept of owning it!!!

"All is not lost for the buyer, who, let’s face it, was going to have to deal with the demise of the banana at some point. The work apparently comes with a certificate of authenticity, and owners can replace the banana. “[Datuna] did not destroy the art work. The banana is the idea,” Lucien Terras, a director at the gallery, told the Miami Herald"

Oh.. Yeah, I can't defend this shit anymore. That's just fucking stupid.

[Verdugo]

Wall Of Banana Exhibit Vandalized With Lipstick At Art Basel: ‘Epstien Didn’t Kill Himself’


The plot thickens...

This banana is giving me some serious "He will not divide us" vibes.

[d00mGuArD]

This banana is giving me some serious "He will not divide us" vibes.

This adds at least 20k to the price