5 ms·

They're not holding on to cherished memories. > “The paintings have always just sort of been here,” she says, with a chuckle. “We were sort of behind the times

They're not holding on to cherished memories. > “The paintings have always just sort of been here,” she says, with a chuckle. “We were sort of behind the times… it never occurred to us that anyone would want them.” They've got stacks of his paintings piled up on the floor. Nothing in the article indicates that they cherish them or are curating them. I don't have a problem with that, but it's not like they're doing anyone any good where they are. Bob Ross wanted to make painting approachable and demystify it. He started out selling them himself, sold them or gave them away throughout his career. He knew they weren't high art; that was kinda the point. I think he would want them sold off if having one brought joy to someone. Contrary to crushing feelings of goodwill, I think his fans would be grateful for the opportunity to have one of his paintings for themselves. They're not one-of-a-kind masterpieces that belong in a museum; they're paintings for the people.

KONAir 5y ago
His demysfitication should have been followed up with "keep at it as much as you can, even if nobody else values as much as you do". I find it sad his message got lost; even you can't produce a master piece loved by anyone else (because it is objectively just "bad") your experience is important to you. It doesn't matter if others like it or pretend as if it is likeable; you made a painting and that's all that matters. It doesn't have to live up to standarts, it doesn't have to be appericated or notice in history. I think encouraging people to feel "this oily matter stuck on bursh is now making shapes I can interpret on canvas" is more than enough. (I am super drunk and voliating like 3 or more curfew law things, super sorry for the murder of engrish, but I love Bob Ross)
gwern 5y ago
Cherished indeed: https://news.artnet.com/art-world/bob-ross-paintings-smithsonian-1634419 https://news.artnet.com/art-world/bob-ross-paintings-smithso... "In a short video report produced by the Times, Joan Kowalski, the president of Bob Ross, Inc., explained that while the company does indeed store Ross’s many works—around 1,165 of them—they lack the resources to do so properly. The video shows the paintings stacked in everyday cardboard boxes, piled together in a bland office space without much of a filing system. “They’re not ‘climate-controlled,’” Kowalski explains with air quotes, adding that it’s not “white glove service.”" Interesting to think a little about how Harberger taxes would fix this; no one can make the company treat the paintings better or do something more productive with them, because 'property is monopoly' - but if they had to pay a Harberger tax on the tens of millions of dollars those paintings were worth, they would probably discover that they can in fact do something better with them than stacking them randomly like lumber to get moldy in a warehouse or that people would happily take the paintings off their hands...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

KONAir 5y ago

His demysfitication should have been followed up with "keep at it as much as you can, even if nobody else values as much as you do". I find it sad his message got lost; even you can't produce a master piece loved by anyone else (because it is objectively just "bad") your experience is important to you. It doesn't matter if others like it or pretend as if it is likeable; you made a painting and that's all that matters. It doesn't have to live up to standarts, it doesn't have to be appericated or notice in history. I think encouraging people to feel "this oily matter stuck on bursh is now making shapes I can interpret on canvas" is more than enough. (I am super drunk and voliating like 3 or more curfew law things, super sorry for the murder of engrish, but I love Bob Ross)

gwern 5y ago

Cherished indeed: https://news.artnet.com/art-world/bob-ross-paintings-smithsonian-1634419 https://news.artnet.com/art-world/bob-ross-paintings-smithso... "In a short video report produced by the Times, Joan Kowalski, the president of Bob Ross, Inc., explained that while the company does indeed store Ross’s many works—around 1,165 of them—they lack the resources to do so properly. The video shows the paintings stacked in everyday cardboard boxes, piled together in a bland office space without much of a filing system. “They’re not ‘climate-controlled,’” Kowalski explains with air quotes, adding that it’s not “white glove service.”" Interesting to think a little about how Harberger taxes would fix this; no one can make the company treat the paintings better or do something more productive with them, because 'property is monopoly' - but if they had to pay a Harberger tax on the tens of millions of dollars those paintings were worth, they would probably discover that they can in fact do something better with them than stacking them randomly like lumber to get moldy in a warehouse or that people would happily take the paintings off their hands...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]