Something perverse about this ...

 

IMHO, something's perverse about the upcoming sale of one of Warhol's Marilyn prints but it's not about the piece, it's about how much money billionaires will pay for said art. Tulip time resides big time in terms of buying art or could it be an artistic way to launder money? One never knows, do one?

Will This Warhol Become the Most Expensive Artwork Ever Sold?

When one of the pop artist’s famed portraits of Marilyn Monroe goes to auction next month, some observers think it could fetch up to half a billion dollars. What is it about this particular work that gives it such potential to break the market?

“Two hundred is a huge benchmark. It’s the highest reported estimate ever, it’s the highest estimate ever put on an artwork,” said Alex Rotter, the Christie’s chairman who’s overseeing the sale. “Could we have set more? You could always say more.”

Many are indeed saying more, making the $200 million mark seem not like the estimate—but the jumping-off point. Several dealers, advisers, auction specialists, and Warhol experts who I spoke to recently believe that, if the right tech billionaires, Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds, Asian foundations, or pandemic-enriched shipping magnates go head-to-head during the bidding, the work could hammer as high as $500 million, making it the most expensive artwork of all time—a marker currently held by Salvator Mundi, a rendering of Jesus Christ attributed to Leonardo da Vinci that went for $450 million in 2017.

Leonardo da Vinci (alone) or Leonardo with workshop participation

Nothing personal but the talent required to paint the Mundi is somewhat higher than creating a silkscreen print of a photograph is it not?