Would you look at the state of what passes for art these days? This painting sold for twenty six thousand Australian dollars, yet it looks like it was painted by a two year old just throwing paint at a canvas. Bloody ridiculous. Still Aelita Andre, the young artist who painted it, probably wont mind me saying that. Hell, she was actually two years old when she painted it so I doubt there's any grounds for the currently three year old artist to be annoyed. Plus, ya know, she can't read yet.
I find it stupendously descriptive of the whole modern art scene that a three year old has already painted and sold thirty two paintings for thousands of dollars each. The worst thing about it is that the media have spent more time criticising the girl's parents than they have her art. They say the girl is being exploited by her parents so that they can make a quick buck. Yeah, cause that's the problem with this scenario. If you ask me, which I'll assume you did as you're still reading, the parents have found a novel way to make a little money towards the ever rising cost of raising a child. Yes they are exploiting people, but they're exploiting those who read emotions into a spill and pay thousands to own that spill, not their own daughter. If these idiots are willing to pay thousands to own art that not only looks like a two year old's tantrum with paint but is a two year old's tantrum with paint, then they deserve to be exploited.
Aelita's parents put most of the proceeds from sales of her paintings into a trust fund for the young girl to use when she's older, and the rest goes on paint.