Man Eats $120,000 Banana!

Hello everyone. Welcome back to By Amara. This is a weekly news show where I discuss contemporary events in the art and history fields.

Nope. I am not doing that anymore. I forgot my intro.

Let's try that again. This is a weekly news show where we'll look at some of the weird, strange and just downright odd things that happened in the art and history fields. This week, I'm your host…

Okay, let's just try this again. Give me one sec.

Okay. Hello everyone. Welcome back to By Amara.

This is a weekly news show where we'll look at some of the weird, strange and just downright odd things that have happened in the art and history fields. I'm your host and personal curator, Amara Andrew. This week, we're talking about a hidden man in a Vermeer painting, the background in the Mona Lisa is actually a real location, most historic art series ever created, and Maurizio Cattelan's Comedian has been eaten.

We have all that and more coming up on this episode of By Amara. Let's get to it.

Yikes. That was rough, I'm so sorry. I take a week off and everything is just falling apart.

I was saying to Jeff when we were setting this up, I was like, I kind of don't remember what goes where and what we do. And a couple people on TikTok have pointed out that this lamp behind me looks like a hat. They thought I was dressed like a nun.

Or not a nun, a nurse for some reason. I don't know, I was wearing a white sweatshirt, which clearly is not what nurses wear. Well, they can, but whatever.

Anyway, so I'm just falling apart today, I guess. So, anywho, sorry I missed last week. We were traveling, which I'll tell you all about that in just a second.

I thought I would record in person, but we were actually in Arizona. I guess I'll just tell you now. So, we got home from Arizona last Wednesday, I think, or Tuesday, I don't know, something like that, last week at some point.

And I had planned on recording my podcast while we were there, but then I was actually there for a bachelorette party, so that was a little chaotic, which bachelorette parties are, it was like a whole weekend. But anyway, so it just things didn't work out. So, I'm so sorry, but if you're watching this in the future, it doesn't even matter, so just ignore me, I guess.

So, Arizona was very fun, that is where I was born and raised. So, it was lovely to go back. I haven't been back in almost a decade, too, which was really cool.

So, everything is very different, but also very much the same. I got to go to my old hometown area, so I lived in both Scottsdale and Fountain Hills, so I was able to go around Scottsdale and the McCormick Ranch area where I grew up, and then I was able to go around Fountain Hills. Fountain Hills looked exactly the same.

There was like barely any difference or anything. It was very surreal to be back just because I haven't been back in over a decade now. And it was just it was weird because I have so many memories there, so it was like, "Oh, I remember doing that." And it was nice being able to show Jeff, and it was just really fun.

Oh, one really cool thing, too. Enterprise, shout out, they're not a sponsor, but shout out to you. So, I always rent the like cheapest car possible just because why would I spend more money because I don't need to.

And I got the economy or whatever. The guy at Enterprise hooked us up! We got I just thought we'd get like a Ford Fiesta or something, like just something very baseline, totally fine, whatever.

Well, so when we showed up, I saw an Audi, it was I think the A8, but it was like the souped up sports car version. It looked amazing, and I was like, "Ooh, that looks very nice." And I was just talking to the guy, just saying hi and whatever. And then I just said like, "Ooh, that's a really nice car," and he's like, "Oh yeah, that's like our luxury whatever model," and I was like, "Oh yeah, that's way out of my price range." And so then he's like, "No, totally get it," because I think that car would have been it would have been a lot of money, I have no idea.

But anyway, so then we were just talking, he's like, "Oh, what are you guys doing?" And I just said, "Oh, I'm from here, but then I'm here for a bachelorette party, blah, blah, blah." He's like, "Okay, you go stand over there and wait." Another guy comes and gets us to take us to our car. We have a brand new Mustang convertible GT.

It was the most amazing car to have, especially in Scottsdale. It was like absolutely perfect. Jeff, while I was at the bachelorette party, he was by himself, so he got to cruise around in this Mustang convertible and show off and do fun things, so anyway, that was definitely a highlight for me.

Also, a highlight was seeing a lot of my old friends or basically just like my two best friends growing up, which was awesome. One of them, it was the bachelorette party for. The other one, she was like one of my absolute best friends in high school, so it was just really nice to get to see her and meet her husband and everything, which is crazy that people are getting married now.

Yeah, the bachelorette party was very fun, that was in Flagstaff, so Jeff and I drove up from Scottsdale and we went to Flagstaff. We stopped in Sedona, of course, and then we were in Flagstaff. Jeff hung around and did whatever, he stayed in his own little Airbnb, and then I was at the bachelorette party, which was a hootenanny.

It was very fun, it was super relaxing, and it was just really nice getting to see people I haven't seen in a while and meet new friends and blah, blah, blah, so very excited for the wedding in October. And then Jeff and I, we drove down, leaving Flagstaff, we drove back to Scottsdale to stay because then we just went to the airport the next day, and we stopped in Montezuma Castle on the way down between Flagstaff and Scottsdale.

That was amazing. Jeff and I now have a whole thing where we want to stop at all the national parks and monuments because it's just so cool. Montezuma Castle is I think it's like a it's a housing complex that's in the limestone wall like of a mountain.

I have a photo up here if you're watching this, obviously you can see that. It's just absolutely amazing. It was built or utilized, rather, between I think 1060 to 1500, it was somewhere around there, and it is so freaking cool to see.

It looks huge because it's up high, but then when you think about We actually We saw a little squirrel running around and I was like, "Oh, this actually isn't that big at all." And it's this really elaborate system of tunnels and windows and different housing things. Anyway, it was just so freaking sweet to see, so I highly recommend it.

I think it was in Camp Verde in Arizona. So, if you ever get a chance, it is off the beaten path a little bit, but it's totally worth it. I got a pin because I collect pins.

They're over by my desk, but you can't see them right now. And we got a little stamp, they have like a passport that you can get, so anyway, we're just very excited about national parks and monuments, so that's kind of going to be our new thing. So, that was basically how the trip went in Arizona, it was very fun.

It was fun connecting reconnecting with people who I haven't seen them in person in a very long time, but it kind of feels like you just picked up where you left off. Like, there's no weird kind of period. It's just like, okay, well, what do we talk about?

Oh, we'll just like catch up on life and stuff. I don't know, it was really good, so definitely recommend reconnecting with people, some people, if you would like. Other than that, just been working on growing and expanding my brand MAVEN, which has been amazing.

It's a videography service to help people make social media content and try to make it as easy and painless as possible because I know it's a lot of stress and pressure. That has been amazing. You can learn all about it at whatismaven.com, link in the description below.

I think without further ado, let's just get to the stories.

In our first story, there may be a hidden man in a Vermeer painting. The painting in question is A Maid Asleep and it is from circa 1656 and it resides at the Met. This painting features a solitary woman who sits at a table.

She appears to be asleep and her head is popped up on her on her arm, so her elbows resting on the table and her head is in her hand, well her opposite, whatever. If you're watching this, I did it the wrong way. There is a menacingly open door over her right shoulder.

It's it's not actually that menacing, but it just it's open and it could be a little creepy. That's just a very common motif that you'll see in a lot of Vermeer things, Vermeer paintings, things, just those things he created. But you'll see that in a lot of Vermeer paintings because it's actually a passage through the painting and you get to see these added like interior spaces, and it's this whole public versus private, and it's a lot.

I studied it for my graduate thesis, and it's just a very fascinating topic, so if you're ever curious. Oh, also, if you like Vermeer, you should watch Tim's Vermeer. It's a documentary and it's very cool, anyway.

Okay, back to the woman. So, she's seated at this table, it has a luxurious carpet on it and I think like a bowl of fruit, I don't have it pulled up right now for some reason because I am stupid. And the door behind her, you can see like the interior scene, and it's just a very like calm kind of piece.

So, back to this hidden image. While the Met has known that there's actually a hidden male figure within this piece, it wasn't until they used X-ray fluorescence or XRF to see that the figure actually might be an artist holding a paintbrush at an easel. And some researchers even believe that this might be a self-portrait of Vermeer, but that's kind of it's not really been verified yet, I'll say.

So, obviously, Vermeer painted over this man because I guess he didn't want it in the context of the piece, which we'll talk about that in a second. And then he also refashioned the easel so that it actually looks like the window frame instead of just you know, this easel. So, he was able to reuse it.

And it is amazing how much context shifts within these paintings because if you had the artist in it with the easel, they would have been further back in the composition. There may have also been even a dog, apparently, which that would also change the context of this position composition, rather. With the inclusion of the male figure and the dog, this could actually have been read as kind of an image of seduction.

Dogs typically meant fidelity, it kind of depended on how they were how they were painted or how they were modeled. So, if the dog was like asleep, it'd be like, "Oh yeah, they're not worried about the fidelity and everything." If they were barking, it would be not a good symbol, so it kind of depends on what the dog actually looked like if it was alert or if it was just kind of hanging out.

And then that would also change the context of the female seated in the image where she wouldn't be necessarily a maid, but she would have actually just been a model. So, all that context is really interesting. It just it kind of shows the creative process of the artist where it's like, "No, Vermeer didn't want it to have this specific connotation like a lot of his other paintings do, which are images of seduction." Same with Gerard ter Borch, just kind of very similar sort of vibe.

It just shows how much context is relied upon all these different things that you can read within the painting, which is so fun. I love it. I love like reading paintings, it's one of my favorite hobbies and that's why Jeff doesn't want to go to art museums with me because I'll just He doesn't mind, but I'll just like sit there staring at all of it and try to figure out the narrative of it, which was the whole point because then, I mean, if you think about it, you didn't have TV, you didn't have your phones, you didn't have most things.

You didn't really even have books at certain time periods, not as widely available because they were expensive until a few modern inventions. Anyway, I'm just rambling, but very short story. It just is really interesting to see how much the context changes in these pieces, and hopefully with future scans, we can actually see if this is a self-portrait of Vermeer, and I'm also very curious to hear about that little doggy.

Okay, on to the next story.

I always get lost in that song because I'm like, "Yeah, let's see where this goes," and then I forget that I am doing a podcast. Anywho, when you think of the Mona Lisa, you think of her signature smile and her maybe lack of eyebrows, but you also probably think of the beautiful, creepy, dreamy landscape behind her, rolling hills, dense tree lines, all that fun stuff.

That actually might be a real location. Many researchers throughout history have been trying to figure out where this actually is in Italy, and one specific researcher may have cracked the case, specifically looking at the bridge in the painting. So, Silvano Vinceti believes that the bridge was the Romito di Laterina, an Etruscan-Roman structure in the Italian province of Arezzo.

Arezzo. Sorry, there's no i, Arezzo. Vinceti used a combination of historical documents, drone footage and photos of the area to surmise this, and he was also able to determine that the Romito bridge, which I'll tell you about that in a second because that was really fascinating, but he noticed that the Romito bridge had four arches, just like the bridge in the painting behind Mona Lisa.

Previous theories suggested that the bridge was either the Ponte Bobbio in the northern city of Piacenza or the Ponte Buriano, located in the Tuscan province of Arezzo. These bridges, though, have six arches instead of four, so they were just completely discredited. This is what's also really cool about what Vinceti did.

There's only one arch remaining of the Romito, which originally stretched across the Arno River. There are also the foundations of the bridge that are on the opposite side of the riverbank, but Vinceti measured this singular arch of the bridge and was able to determine and calculate, obviously it's just like basic math, but he was able to calculate that there were four arches here originally that fit exactly, perfectly within this space, so it lends a lot more credibility to his theory.

He also consulted documents in the Medici family collection in Florence State Archives that stated between 1501 to 1503, the bridge was, quote, "a very busy, functioning bridge." And it was super busy because it actually provided a shortcut between Arezzo, Fiesole and Florence, or Firenze. He also pointed out that da Vinci was in this specific area at this time.

First at the service of Cesare Borgia, a famous cardinal, and then for statesman Piero Soderini. Vinceti also found articles stating that da Vinci often resided in Fiesole because his uncle was a priest, so he more than likely came across this bridge at least once or twice or a few times. The mayor of Laterina, the city where the bridge is located, has stated that Vinceti's theory has caused quite a stir in the town, very positive though.

Many people are very excited, probably because of the uptick in tourism that will probably occur. She did state though that, "We need to protect what's left of the bridge, which will require funding," so if this becomes a huge thing, which it sounds like it might, then hopefully they can get the funding from that. So, again, another very quick story.

There It feels like every few years somebody's trying to prove that this bridge like this bridge is that bridge that's in the Mona Lisa, or that bridge is that bridge, or whatever. But this actually This seems to have proper documentation around it, but I guess we'll see, time will tell, and we'll just kind of go from there.

So, I will keep you updated on all other manner of bridge-related activity, so on to our next story.

A few days ago, as of this recording, art history was made by famed photographer Jeremy Cowart, but not in the way you might assume. On May 2nd, Cowart created 10,000 artworks in a series called Aurans in just a matter of 20 minutes in front of a live audience. This story just gets more and more spectacular, but what's really cool about this is this is the first time Cowart has ever publicly revealed his creative process that he has spent 10 years actively and privately developing within his studio.

And, like I said, it just keeps getting more spectacular. Not only that, but Cowart was actually the blank canvas in this piece. So, I'm going to explain all of this, but you can watch the entire video at cowart.io/aurans, I'll link it in the description below, it is fascinating.

So, here we go. Cowart wore all white, including a white mask that completely covered any and all features of his, so he was just literally a blank canvas. He sat in a chair, and then he also used white hats to change his silhouette.

So, he did like a baseball cap and he had it pointed forward and backward and to the side, he had a cowboy hat, he had a couple different hats, he had at one point 3D glasses, he had a couple different accessories and things like that to kind of shake it up. He then used his patent-pending lighting techniques, robotics, multiple layers of projection behind him and on him, and he also had a massive 130 ft $5 million LED volume screen behind him.

What happened was, in the video, you can see this, which I highly recommend watching it because it is fascinating, I love it. I love performance art and I find it so cool. He is sitting in the chair, there's one projection that is coming directly on him and only fitting his silhouette, no matter what it is, which is so fucking cool.

The screen behind him also has lights going, there's another screen with different images and things popping in and out, so you have very different patterns and colors and different subject matter and things like that, and just going at various different speeds. You really have to look at this because I'm trying to explain it and I'm not doing any justice, but it is so cool to see.

He's also done some really amazing other projects, like Broken Queens I believe is the name of it, and then lightscapes where you literally like in Broken Queens Hold on, let me see. Block Queens, not Broken Queens, Block Queens. Block Queens is also a generative project, but the way that it functions is each piece has multiple layers to it.

So, you see it as the full image as you open up the NFT, or like you click on your NFT, but then if you scroll on the screen with your finger or your cursor, it will shift and you can see every single layer to it. It is so cool. It's like basically a Photoshop document, but you can see each individual layer, it's fascinating.

That one's really cool, so is lightscapes, because that one, where you move your finger or your cursor, it shows you different lighting and stuff. He is doing such phenomenal work. It is so cool, which obviously, because he's done amazing work throughout his whole career, but this is really cool.

During the performance piece, while different images were showing, and it was like constant, it was like maybe half a second for each thing, so it was just constantly changing, he had a remote for his camera, so then it could take images very, very quickly. And then also there was a an audio component to it, if you listen to the video, where another artist he used her art, obviously with her permission, to accompany the entire performance piece.

It is really beautiful and fascinating, and it's a lot of orchestral kind of stuff, and I love it. So, anyway, what's even cooler, though, about this 10,000 piece project is that it was created start to finish without relying on any generative code. In a typical PFP project, rarity traits, so like any identifying traits like background, hair, skin, shirt, whatever, like anything like that is done with a hired illustrator, and then the generative code is used to produce randomized images, so then you can get, you know, different variations of the things without having repeating images.

This, though, was all performed live, so each specific trait is going to be customized. So, there were the lighting setups, like I said, and then, oh, Cowart would also like move his head to the side or move it like that or look that way, and just like various different things, so each one is going to be very unique. The project was created by Cowart in partnership with OpenSea, Transient Labs, VUE, Evolve Studios, Canon and Profoto, so there's quite a bit of money that went into this project.

It is really fascinating, you seriously have to go look. The mint date was for Aurans was yesterday, as of this recording, so May 9th, or technically today, but the mint date was yesterday, May 9th on OpenSea, so if you're listening to this in the future, you'll have to go to secondary market to go get it. Jeff actually got one, we don't know what it is yet, so maybe I will I will debut it in the next episode, but if you have one, tweet it at me or something @amaraandrew, very simple and straightforward.

I'd be very curious to see what you have, so yeah, now time for our final story.

I don't think I quite expressed how amazed I am at that piece. It's just so cool. I just love the entirety of it, like everything was done so well, and it took forever.

It took over a decade for him to figure all this out, so anyway, on to our next story. This isn't the first time someone has eaten this artwork. And it probably won't be the last.

Maurizio Cattelan's piece Comedian has been featured in headlines a surprisingly high amount for many different reasons. The first obviously was when it debuted at Art Basel Miami Beach in 2019. Shortly thereafter, while it was on view, an artist named David Datuna ate the piece, because he remarked on how ridiculous it is that millions of people are dying and then someone was able to make half a million dollars from a banana that cost 20 cents.

I think that's a pretty great performance piece that David did. So, now again, Comedian is in headlines because it was eaten by a South Korean university student who claimed to have skipped breakfast. Comedian was on view at the Leeum Museum of Art in Seoul, which has an entire retrospective dedicated to Cattelan's artwork, so not just Comedian, but that was just one of the main pieces that were on display.

An art major, like I said, at Seoul from Seoul National University went to go look at the show, he visited the artwork, ate the banana and then taped the peel back up to the wall. I find it very comical. I mean, it is a destruction of property and of artwork, but it is such It is an artwork that is kind of It's asking you to It's a really weird thing because on the one hand, I'm like, "Well, no.

Why would you ruin an artwork like that?" But at the same time, it's funny because it's a renewable thing. Like, the banana is added fun fact, the banana is changed out every 2 or 3 days before it gets rotten. So, you always have a fresh banana in there, so it's kind of like, well, no harm, no foul.

You just put another banana in there and it's like ready to go. I mean, that to me is like the perfect piece of art where you can just like have a new it's a new piece every time you put a banana into it, so I don't know. That would be hilarious if you had to document that and all the provenance.

Oh my god, like where you bought the banana from, how much it was. That would actually be really fascinating, I hope they do it. They probably don't, whoever owns this piece, but I think that'd be really cool.

So, anyway, a friend of this student filmed the whole ordeal, which lasted for about a minute, so you can find it online. When asked by people why he did it, the student originally responded that he had skipped breakfast, as I mentioned before. But then he later elaborated that he thought it'd be funny if he reattached the peel to the wall after eating the banana, which I do find very funny.

I'm all about conserving artwork and things like that, but this is a piece where, you know, you can just replace it. Like, you can replace every piece of it, every piece of it, which I think is the beauty of it, because then it's like, well, no harm, no foul. We'll just get more duct tape, more bananas and we're set.

So, Cattelan was notified when this happened, and apparently he replied, "No problem." Just very laissez-faire. Again, because like I said, it's it's that is kind of the whole point of the piece is many people hate it because it is so simplistic. I think another artist was actually suing Cattelan because he came up with the idea, he claims, 13 years earlier and stuff like that, so it's just a very silly piece.

It says a lot. It also says, "Eat me," apparently, to certain people, so I don't know. I just wanted to end on that because I just found it so silly.

So, I guess if you're hungry, go look at a Maurizio Cattelan piece. There are other artworks, though, that actually ask you to eat them, for a very specific reason, like Felix Gonzalez-Torres, his pieces come to mind, just because they're different candy sculptures and you literally are supposed to eat pieces of it, depending on the institution, but at the Art Institute, there's one, and it's Untitled (Portrait of Ross in L.A.), I believe is the name, made in the '90s, and that is It's a really beautiful piece, actually.

It makes me cry every time I look at it, but it's to symbolize his partner who died of AIDS and to show or no, it was made in the '90s, sorry, not the '70s. Duh. But it's to symbolize his partner who died of AIDS and how his body weight was decreasing rapidly in his last final days, and it's it's just a really beautiful piece.

So, very, very different context to it versus Maurizio Cattelan's Comedian, but anyway, so there are lots of edible pieces out there if you ever want to write a paper about it. So, that'll do it for this episode of By Amara. Thanks so much for listening, and please like and subscribe, it really helps me just be able to keep doing this show.

I don't ask anything really typically, so just if you can do those few things, I really, truly appreciate it and that really helps. I love you, I hope everything's going well for you, and as always, I'm Amara Andrew, never stop creating.

Jeff loves you, too. Oh, he loves me, sorry, not you. I love you, and I love him, I love everybody.

Bye.