Oh great, now everyone will obssesively search thier own name to drive up thier rank.... um, I got to go ....
posted by R. Mutt at 7:59 AM on October 18, 2005

BTW, there were newspaper stories about Chamberlain getting in trouble from the copyright owners of Batman recently... so most likely the reason for the high rank.
posted by R. Mutt at 8:01 AM on October 18, 2005

Artists who have created the most lithographs become the most popular on artnet. Strange to see some great artists languishing so far down, but their work is all but unobtainable.
posted by fire&wings at 8:13 AM on October 18, 2005

BTW, there were newspaper stories about Chamberlain getting in trouble from the copyright owners of Batman recently... so most likely the reason for the high rank.

That's the mark chamberlain link.

The whole story seems very anachronistic to me, though. Old looking work creates a old feeling court case.
posted by gilgamix at 8:14 AM on October 18, 2005

Goddamn, it irks me to see Damien Hirst ranking higher than folks like Francis Bacon, Louise Bourgeois, and even Van Gogh.
His most recent show of paintings (at Gagosian last spring, I think) was some of the most uninteresting, juvenile, submediocre drivel that I've seen in a long while. How can he even look at himself in the mirror, being a contemporary of a guy like Tim Hawkinson?
posted by Jon-o at 8:27 AM on October 18, 2005

Sorry gilamix, it seems fine now, but the first time I clicked on the Chamberlain it didn't load properly. I had assumed that it was a link to his work.
posted by R. Mutt at 9:06 AM on October 18, 2005

I had sex under a Louise Bourgeois spider a couple of times.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 9:16 AM on October 18, 2005

Um, thanks for sharing that Jesse... good thing it was a spider and not a praying mantis.
posted by R. Mutt at 9:25 AM on October 18, 2005

Great post. What does it say about the art scene that Warhol is #1? Little is going on - that' what
posted by flowfeel at 7:04 PM on October 18, 2005