Doom972 said:
A Weakgeek said:
Doom972 said:
That's what an artist has to say about destroying a work of art? "Brilliant"?
A massproduced comic book is about as much "art" as one of those postcards with mona lisa that you can buy from a museum souvenir shop. Sure, if it was the original piece the artist made which was used to make the prints Id understand the reaction, but thats not the case here.
Just because a massproduced copy of something becomes rare, doesn't mean it gains artistic merit.
It was mass-produced, but most copies were destroyed or left in a bad condition. Very few copies in mint condition exist. I don't know which sort of art form you personally value, so take this generic response:
I hope that [insert a masterpiece of favorite art-form here] gets destroyed in order to make [product that can be made by using the material said masterpiece is mostly made from].
I get that you like comics, as a guy who likes to draw them, I totally get that.
But how is a copy of avengers #1 printed in the 80s/90s more valuable (not counting money/collectors sense) than a reprint today? The artist had exactly as much to do with the creation of both. (That is to say, he made the original, sent it to the publisher and they made thousands upon thousands of copies)