Notable depictions of money in art, 10 points.
I offer this explanation of the inclusion of the Balthasar van der Ast painting of flowers: in the decade before the market crash of 1637, an economic bubble now called "tulip mania" gripped the Netherlands. For reasons we may never fully understand, irrational hyperfetishization gripped the country, and the market value of several visually-striking rare tulips peaked in the tens of thousands of florins (apparently hundreds of times the average annual salary in those days). As such, any painting of such a prized flower made during that time ought to be considered a painting of money. The crash was brutal to the Dutch economy, and to add aura to injury, every single one of those flowers soon died out from the Mosaic virus (the disease which gave them the exotic striated look to begin with), leaving us to wonder what they must have looked like in person to make people behave so insensibly toward them.
See another installation view of Cornelia Parker’s piece here.
And never forget what Hennessy Youngman said about Damien Hirst.
Sam Javanrouh (Toronto based Photographer/Creative Director)
Lunar Eclipse captured on December 21st, 2010 (via)