Valentine's Day... with ventricles


23 Responses to “Valentine's Day... with ventricles”

  1. Ugly Canuck says:

    This is art: so the stuff is inherently non-utilitarian. Useless. Of no value…oh, wait.

    It is “worth” what people will pay. No more. No less.
    But that does not mean that those buyers “know what they are doing”: or that they know how to put an accurate dollar value upon the emotional states (if indeed there are any such) evoked in them by the object.
    Still less does it mean that the artist is pricing (or “valuing”? Ah, that’s another question…) her work correctly.

    Warhol had his ghostwriters say some interesting stuff about the business of art (or was it the art of business?)
    but OTOH, the ghostwriters are whores, and Warhol claimed (in his ghostwritten Diaries!) that he would sign the occasional fake presented to him for authentication….

    Fact is, people ought to buy art if they like it, and they can afford it.
    As to what the art qua object may be “worth”, what’s that compared to one’s own happiness, in this calculation?

    Its price upon a sale in the future, however, will serve as a combination of a judgment upon the purchaser’s taste, and as a reflection of the tastes & fashions of the time at which it comes up for sale. Where one starts, and the other ends in the determination of price, I cannot say. In any case.

  2. Felton says:

    Does she have a heart of gold?

    I mean, for sale, like this one? :-D

  3. magpie bessie says:

    Yay! I am so glad that Ms. Skemp wrote in to defend herself against the haters! Folks, artists need to make money at their art; otherwise they can not create the art(this is especially true of jewelers who use precious materials to make art). If you like a world where folks imagine, create and share beautiful(and ugly and wonderful and frightening and transcendent, etc) things, then you need to support the artists who make them.

  4. nanuq says:

    Does it beat?

  5. Anonymous says:

    You can also find a (much more affordable) version of the anatomical heart necklace here:

    The cost is $47 as opposed to $236.

  6. Anonymous says:

    I am the artist and I will say that my work is not mass produced. I carve an original wax then cast them and finish them. One other jeweler helps me with the finishing, but each piece is hand made in Chicago. I sell a more modest version which does not open for $47. There is a lot of attention paid to detail and each piece is meticulously finished. Next I plan on working on some very fantastical brain pieces and then lacy entomology stuff. I will say that for what I charge, the materials are very expensive and it takes me a lot of time, so there is actual value- as opposed to a painting which has little actual value in terms of materials. I stand behind the work and the prices. Thanks for looking.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Also, its not a knock-off. That picture in comment #20 is a picture I took of the very first one that I made, then I had someone take a more presentable photograph.

  8. Anonymous says:

    No detail has gone ignored… (save actual blood).

    Well, they just lost Creepy-chan’s business then, didn’t they.

  9. moioci says:

    That’d be the left lower pulmonary vein. (There are two on each side.)

  10. MichaelRN says:

    The price will most likely drop to a reasonable level with the passing of Valentine’s Day. If there’s a market for it, competition will eventually drive down the price, too.

  11. zikman says:

    I need this, to give to my metal-working, jewelry-making friend.

  12. Lobster says:

    I’m conflicted on this. I love the irony, but I don’t think I love it $236 worth.

  13. Anonymous says:

    In an old episode of the Mary Tyler Moore show, Mary’s father (a surgeon, IIRC) gives her a heart-shaped pin or locket. She’s confused because it’s an anatomically correct heart shape. Life imitates art.

  14. magpie bessie says:

    I like it. The concept and execution are fantastic and show a high level of craft and inspiration. If I could afford one I would buy it. I hope that the artist does well with the sales of her work; she deserves every cent.

  15. Maximillian says:

    Wow, the price jumped $26 and she added more to the store. I guess that when you get attention, the natural response is to jack up the price and get your mass production on.

  16. Steve Schnier says:

    Yeah. I agree with Lobster. It’s very nice, but the price seems a bit high. I’m sure they’ll find buyers, but they’d sell many more at a lower price point.

  17. Caroline says:

    Raising the price is called “supply and demand.” If she’s selling a lot of them at the higher price, good for her. If she’s not selling as many as she’d like, she’ll drop the price again.

    It’s a hand-crafted, complex, sculptural piece of silver jewelry, not a corporate mass-produced piece. You want a $10 silver necklace, go to Walmart. A piece like that — the materials, work, time, quality — is definitely worth a couple hundred.

    I want it bad — I’m in cardiac electrophysiology — but can’t afford it (that’s called being a grad student). Oh well. Some things are just worth more than I can afford.

  18. Caroline says:

    For those looking for a lower price point, the same seller has a half-heart necklace for $80: Same thing, except only the front half of the heart.

  19. Lobster says:

    Maximillian, Caroline, you’re both right. She isn’t an evil person for charging what the market will bear. It could be that it’s worth more than I personally would be willing to pay for it. If she is mass-producing them then it seems like a bit of a rip-off but again, if they’re selling then the price is right.

    In the end, I know I’m not going to get one so I’ll just appreciate it as a neat idea.

Leave a Reply