This line seems to encapsulate the movement as a whole There isn't that much to be said that these line doesn't express. The only thing i can do is to express my opinion. I agree with these sentiment. After all anything that you attach a price to becomes valuable thus runs the potential of becoming a commodity. So by default it becomes part of commerce by joining the holy religion that is capitalism. Art not being an exception. If anything it is the representation of such actions.

These line makes it seem like the biggest flex when you consider that part of what made him famous was the controversy of whether his art was art or not. Simply because it was either due to it being a representation of something that was already made or was something already made. But the fact that he had other people make his art then had other people sing for his art and then having people just accept it as his art for that whole time must be the biggest piece of performance art that has ever been.

This painting or should i say set of paintings made history at the time. I have always seen a variation of these cans but never really understood why. Anything that I looked up seems to point out that the author just really liked them so he painted them. So the main attraction / controversy over the cans is not just that it was if not the first it was one of the first pop culture items to invade the "Fine Arts". it also re-enacted the flames of the discussion of what is art and commercial vs fine arts. which in my personal opinion. If money exchanged hands then it makes it a product thus is a piece of the commerce so no difference between a happy meal and the painting. but if it's free and was made for the soul purpose of it being something that the author of the work needed to make. then it's pure art.

These lines make me want to ask a question that I feel are deeply embedded in the art community in any of it's forms.

Is Stealing Art bad?

because, specially now in the world we live in. We could argue that all art is stolen. It can be best explain with the south park line of "The Simpsons did it"

In reality all art is stolen and plagiaries version of what came before it.

The best way i can illustrate it is by using the Simpsons again. Because The Simpsons stole and plagiaries a lot of ideas and content from the old American Family sitcoms. And Family guy stole and a lot of ideas and content from The Simpsons, Becoming a parody of the Simpsons.

But that's not a bad thing because even though they are extremely similar. Each has it's own flavor. Even if the difference is the same difference between Tonga vanilla and French vanilla.

Making me ask the question. Is stealing art bad?

This is an interesting quote but at the same time you could argue that the Author has always being dead. In reality The author or the painter or the artist in general has always being dead. Most of the time the creation that they have made has gone out of the real that they intended it to be seeing. For example books and music. Most stories even if they have their own agenda and message they want to get across. They tend to be taken out of context. Most of the time for the better. Fan theories and fan fiction is full of it. In a way we are all the author of any given work. Even if you create something you don't always own it. At least not fully. From what I have read so far it makes it seem like art as a science has slowly died. I could be interpreting it wrong. But I could argue that art did not loose it's meaning. We just couldn't ignore the pretentious nature of the animal that is art For example the Mona Lisa. In reality is the old time version of what we consider a selfie today. A lot of paintings that we study and learn about are basically glorified selfies of kings and such. So what's stopping us from going to Instagram and picking a selfie and put it under a magnifying glass and picking things that may have meaning and thus making it art.

So that leaves us with a couple of questions. Was the Author alive to begging with?

Who is the actual author? Is it the one taking and interpreting the work or is it the one creating it?

This line here helps illustrate the evolution of art. By illustrating it as a parent and child personification.. Because it illustrates how an art form can be born from another art form. Become it's unique entity while still being influence by the mother art form. To use one of this writing examples. Rock music was born from the passionate one night stand between Blues and Country music. And almost like a birth mark Rock was also knows as the devils music just like the blues were. Funny enough in the year 2020 I doubt either one is knows as that but when they were new and young. That was a title they both shared.

This is a statement that i hadn't really thought about before. Essentially what i understood from paragraphs 16 and 17 is that art specially in the olden days is that the paintings were very scientific. from the images that were painted to the brush strokes. It kinda explains why studying the science of anatomy helps with painting or drawings of the human body. In reality to learn to paint a hand is to study and understand what makes the hand a hand.

I didn't know who this was so i did a quick google search so for anyone interested I believe the author is talking about Piet Mondrain, Who is regarded as one of the best artist of the 20th century. He is the painter of the painting Composition with Yellow, Blue and Red

This passage makes a point that can be related to today. Because as of 2020 I can say that the arts have been assimilated into entertainment. Even books that can be consider art because they have something to say or pictures that move people. It all has become entertainment. later on the paragraph the author says that Art was able to save itself from becoming pure entertainment. By providing an experience that had more value then silly little cartoons. Except that even famous artist that are not famous due to entertainment have ended up being part or making silly cartoons. For example when Banksy made an opening for the Simpsons. Or people like Shepard Fairey (the Obama hope sing guy) ended being part of a Simpsons episode.