Gallery searches for stolen brick

Gallery searches for stolen brick

Yes. A brick. And not from the gallery's actual structure either. No, someone seems to think that if a certain "artist" writes his signature on an ordinary house brick it suddenly becomes art and worth £3,000. Which is why I'm overcome with delight that some perceptive, quick-witted fellow has taken the opportunity to show it up for the pointless charade that the whole thing typifies. Here's a question - why, if the replacement brick also has writing upon it, is it too not worth £3,000? Is not a "worthless equivalent" an oxymoron? If something is an equivalent, it is the same as the thing it replaces, so logically this new brick should be worth £3,000 as well. In fact, if I got a brick and signed it, then passed it off as "art", I could make three thousand pounds too, couldn't I? Of course not. The whole idea of a signed brick being high art is a farce of the highest order and frankly I fail to understand the mentality of anyone who says otherwise. What we have here, in essence, is little more than a three grand signature. If I were an auctioneer or a valuer and someone approached me with this and asked me for £3,000, I'd call for the men in white coats. Still, you've got to laugh.