# data[].attributes.body
1. Reflective Response:
In a written reflection (250–400 words), address the following questions:

Knowledge Question: To what extent does the context of this artwork influence its perceived value and meaning?​

Contextual Analysis: How do factors such as the artist's reputation, media coverage, and market dynamics contribute to the valuation of conceptual art pieces like Comedian?​

Personal Perspective: Reflect on your own views regarding the value of conceptual art. Do you believe Comedian warrants its multimillion-dollar price tag? Why or why not?​

# data[].attributes.body
To what extent does the context of this artwork influence its perceived value and meaning?

In the context of the post-pandemic, highly excessive era, the artwork is perceived to be a conversation with the times. It is a conversation with the rules that currently govern the art world and how they change to perhaps more ridiculous. The artist is also known for doing commentary like this, so the value is the same as his other works like a Pinocchio toy face down in a pool of water. Not to mention that the crypto boom means people have money to spend in a strange way and be part of history.

How do factors such as the artist’s reputation, media coverage, and market dynamics contribute to the valuation of conceptual pieces like Comedian?

The artist Maurizio Cattelan is extremely famous and known for doing things like this. His art is always extremely strange, challenging traditional ideas and providing social commentary on the art world. It was only with all the Instagramming that it became extremely well known, and gained the backlash from the outside world. The market dynamics also were involved in the price in that the earlier designs created hype, and the current cryptocurrency domain is confident and growing. People are more willing to spend when they don’t think their money won’t run out. It’s all a fight between old and new anyway, with art, money, and the buyers.

Do you believe Comedian warrants its multimillion-dollar price tag?

I believe that I would never pay such a price for something I can do at home. If the buyer is willing to pay such a price and they see the worth, that’s wonderful because they want to do that. I prefer to know the backstory more than have the actual art. I could print out a larger version of the Mona Lisa because it represents the same thing. I don’t need the actual art to have a conversation and understand it.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of this artwork influences its perceived value and meaning to a significant extent. The banana artwork is a piece of art and cultural history. The artist intended for the work to be a commentary on the commodification of creativity, a symbol of impermanence, and a critique of consumer culture. The artist’s reputation as a prankster and provocateur and being a creator of art that comments on society, power, and authority influences the perceived meaning of his work, since all of his other works were about some kind of social commentary, views assume that Comedian would be no different.The buyer of the work, Justin Sun, is a wealthy founder of a cryptocurrency believe the work is not just a banana, but a cultural phenomenon that connects art, memes, and cryptocurrency. Buying this work gave Justin media attention and coincided with a surge in the cryptocurrency market, allowing Justin to use it as a marketing scheme, allowing him to reach new people who might not have known him or his company before. The banana also is a kind of status symbol, Justin owns a piece of cultural history. I don't think that a 35 cent banana deserves a price of 6 million dollars, the artwork has meaning to it, but it is something that anyone can reproduce at home. The people who buy this artwork are not even buying an actual banana, just an instruction manual demonstrating how to tape the banana to the wall and a certificate of authenticity.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of Comedian has affected the piece’s value and meaning to a great extent. The value of the art is determined by public perception as art is valued by perception rather than its material value which is exemplified in the case of the banana in which the cultural standpoint it presents is the context itself giving the piece meaning in the eyes of its audience. This context is what is valued so the context can affect the value and meaning of the art piece to the greatest extent possible.

These factors contribute to the public perception; they allow opinions to change and develop around the art piece these opinions are responsible for the valuation of Comedian. This remains constant in other conceptual art as the purchaser is buying the concept itself in the form of the art piece, so factors like, artists reputation, media coverage, and marked dynamics shape the context in which the art is valued.

I believe that the comedian being valued this high is justified, the value of the art piece is only valued in that way to those who not only observe the context in which the art exists but also have the expendable funds, to somebody who doesn’t have these factors it is just its material existence—a banana on a wall—It does no harm to people wo cannot effect it. If those who can afford it choose to purchase it, then they are observing its perceived value as what they see it: In other words, if they think that they are willing to pay that much money for a conceptual art piece to “own” that concept, then they should be allowed to do so.

# data[].attributes.body
To an extent that’s significant, a cultural context embedded in capitalism to dramatized media influences how Cattelan’s ‘Comedian’ is perceived as valuable. As a ‘banana’ in itself is priced at minimal worth, this instance specifically can only depart to the ‘status quo’ when associated with an external movement. ‘2019’ saw a climate of ‘immature’ and ‘polarized’ politics with presidency of ‘Trump’ to internet ‘memes’ that satirized contemporary issues like exploitation and hyperproductivity. That means this banana derives distinction in a representation or symbolism of how ‘art’ in abstraction interacts with a larger political schema. Though, coverage by media to the reputation of ‘Cattelan’ similarly solidifies popularity of ‘Comedian’. Since early 1990’s to 2000’s, he’s already developed his image as celebrated ‘artist’ with hyperrealist pieces like ‘America’ to ‘Love’. His ‘2019’ release then isn’t necessarily an innovative work based in ‘radical’ or ‘revolutionary’ ideals, but instead solely obtains traction thru a previous ‘reputation’. Press may have chosen to highlight this display at the gallery of ‘Perrotin’ in order to capitalize on his controversial history rather than the exhibit’s intrinsic utility. Personally, I disagree with ‘Comedian’—it doesn’t signify a ‘cultural revolution’ nor does it warrant a multimillion price. One cannot protest while they are ‘in’ but not ‘of’ economic exchange insofar that the fact that he procures ‘profit’ with his pieces proves that he’s indebted to notions of productivity. When it enters the field of public view in order to mobilize investment, it’s commodified immediately into currency instead of critique. Criticisms should stem in embodied performance rather than elite scrutiny.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of this artwork was, in my opinion, created to start conversation. Art is made not only for someone to express themselves, but also as a way to bring people together. Comedian’s context heavily relies on social media. Without social media, a banana taped to a wall wouldn’t have been talked about. The discussion surrounding this banana brought people together—even people who usually don’t care about art were suddenly very interested. All over the world, people were upset, confused, or just curious about why someone would spend more than a few cents on a grocery store banana. But the thing is, the reason someone would spend so much is because everyone was talking about it. The popularity came from conversation, from internet rage, and from people online saying, “I could do that.” Those reactions are what made this specific banana—well, more specifically, the certificate that comes with it—so expensive.

Of course, it wasn’t just internet hype. Without Maurizio Cattelan’s fame in the modern art world, this banana probably wouldn’t have sold for such a high price. Cattelan was already known for making weird, shocking pieces that get people talking. So when Comedian came out, it wasn’t just about the banana—it was about the artist behind it too. The art world cares a lot about who makes something, not just what the thing is. The art market is also really strange. It feeds off of exclusivity, popularity, and buzz. This piece had all three. People weren’t buying a banana—they were buying the idea of the banana, the experience, the fame, and the headlines that came with it. Personally, I don’t think the banana is worth that kind of money. I get why it became a big deal, and I do think it’s kind of funny, but it seems like it’s mostly hype. It made people talk, sure—but at the end of the day, it’s still just a banana taped to a wall.

# data[].attributes.body
The context surrounding this piece of art greatly influences its value and meaning. The controversy surrounding it really brought lots of attention to the piece itself. The context transformed a banana, to a symbol of art, and challenges viewers to question what counts as art and value. It makes them look deeper into the meanings on art and makes them reconsider what exactly is art and on what grounds is art defined.  Cattelan’s established reputation for his pre existing art laid the platform for the piece Comedian. Through the media coverage, its visibility and popularity were increased, starting debates around the world about the arts value. I believe through all this debate about the art piece, it gets turned into unique and iconic piece, that mixed with the artists brand, drives the demand and price for the art. I could never pay that much for something I could make at home for $5, or even less. It’s just not something I could justify though my own values to pay that much for that piece. Even though I wouldn’t pay that much for the Comedian I believe he is entitled to set that price to whatever he thinks its worth. If someone is willing to pay that price and sees value in the object, then they have the free will to buy it. All of our values are different so who am I to tell someone what their values are, they should be free do do as they please, that does not mean it’s something I would personally do.

# data[].attributes.body
Both the perceived value and meaning of this artwork are entirely hinged on the context it is surrounded with. The art is placed in the context of our modern-day rapidly changing world, surrounded by cryptocurrency, memes, and a general societal understanding of excess being the expectation. The story of this art and the controversy around it only enhances its narrative, as people are drawn to the extreme and weird. This is especially evident after the banana used in this exhibit was eaten in protest. The story of the banana skyrocketed in popularity as people became aware of the “mundane” which was somehow being valued at six figures. Eventually being bought for $6.2 million dollars or seven figures, the price of this banana appears vast and insane, until other factors are taken into consideration. The artist, Maurizio Cattelan, has a history of wry commentary intrinsic to his strange and variable art pieces. Reemerging after years of no work, Cattelan is a legend, thus automatically raising the price of his exhibit. Additionally, cryptocurrency was allowed as a method of payment during this auction. The inclusion of this variable stock gave opportunities to many more people to fight for a chance at it. The final buyer of the banana paid for it in this way, thus setting the perceived value at $6.2 million dollars, while its true cost now may be very different. In my opinion, Comedian does not warrant such a large price tag as I personally find little value in it. I do not think that it is worth much of anything as I derive little from it that I would care to pay for. However, I understand that others may have differing views on the worth of this piece and thus do not judge those who bought it.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of the artwork extends a lot of the perceived value and meaning. It looks very boring, cheap, and unimportant. The banana taped to a wall is something any one can do. The artist wanted to make this more than others though. He tried all kinds of forms to create something identical to a banana, but nothing was as good as an actual banana. The artist did this for a reason that others would not, he wanted to break from the "typical museum auctioned art" and surprised the whole world (which he did.) The banana built its value through humor and symbolism. The media contributed heavily to the value. I think the media contributed completely to the value, and artist just got lucky that the media made it popular. Those interested in purchasing the banana knew the social effects that would come with it. I personally do not like this art and would not buy it, but it is the buyers time and money, so he deserves to spend it however he wants. I think that some people care about meaning behind things more than others. I would rather buy art with little/bad meaning but it looks good, than buy a banana that I could buy at the store and pretend it is the same one. I can see how this banana might be "funny" and I do think since it such out of culture and so different, that it will be popular and maybe taught in some classes, so I guess that makes it sound a little more worth it.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that, to a great extent, the context of this artwork influences its perceived value and meaning. Without knowing Cattelan's intention, anyone would think this work of art was just a cheap ploy to make money. In a way, it still could be. But Cattelan's intent in making The Comedian was to critique that very idea: what counts as art? However, I believe that the ultra-wealthy had other ideas when bidding on this piece. To normal people like us, we might laugh and cheer at the rebellion against high-brow art, but to these extremely wealthy art collectors, they just see another thing to collect for themselves. The media coverage made this work a prize to be won, whoever owned it now owned a piece of art history. In that way, it does have value. But, in my opinion, these people only wanted it for bragging rights. As for my own views, I couldn't help but get bitter while reading this article. Our world is actively being destroyed by the insane wealth gap between the top 1% of the world and the other 99%, and here they are, buying works of art for millions of dollars. The amount that banana cost could have changed anyone's life. I don't think it deserved that price, because I don't think anyone should be spending that kind of money on art. Who has a spare six million just lying around to purchase something like that? No one who acquired their money ethically, that's who. Conceptual art isn't visually pleasing to my eye, but I think that it has some merit for its story. Overall, the story of this piece is reflective of the insane wealth gap in the world right now.

# data[].attributes.body
Knowledge Question: To what extent does the context of this artwork influence its perceived value and meaning?

The context of the banana helps give it a higher value and deepen its meaning and relation to the art world. The artwork Comedian was created by Maurizio Cattelan who is famous for being a prankster-provocateur.  The banana itself does not actually have any value because it can easily be replaced, but the true value of the banana comes from its critique on the value of art and ‘meme-y’ nature. The artwork itself does not represent a physical object, but rather the idea that artwork and interpretation can be valued in a variety of ways. When purchasing the artwork, the owner doesn’t receive a banana; instead, they receive a 14-page manual on how and where to place the banana on the wall, demonstrating that its content is what gives it value and contributes to its meaning. The banana is highly associated with memes and cryptocurrency which reflects that the banana is a symbol of satire as it is compared to several meme currencies like Doge-Coin.

The artist’s reputation, media coverage, and market dynamics all contribute to the valuation of Comedian in a variety of ways. Maurizio Cattelan was already a well-known artist as he had already made several artworks but decided to introduce his newest one in 2019 after a 15-year hiatus. This demonstrates that many serious collectors of his works would have already placed an initial value on his artwork. Media coverage also contributed by blowing up this story. The New York Times made a post on it that immortalized it. Additionally, the person who ate the banana also contributed to its value because it created a story for the banana and the media to cover. This drew people’s attention and gave it more value. Market dynamics contributed through Art Intelligence Global’s statement regarding its value and how it depends on the level of liquidity, demonstrating that its initial value is now cemented into the market.

The Comedian does warrant its value, because its value is also what gives it its message. However, I would not personally buy the artwork. Its high value reflects the genius and simplicity of it. Without its high value, it wouldn’t have the same message that it necessary for its critique on how we value art and other works.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of this artwork influences its perceived meaning and value to a great extent. Without the context that surrounds it, “Comedian” is nothing more than a banana and a piece of duct tape, but because of its context, the “Comedian” is a cultural phenomenon that sparks conversation about creativity, consumption, and value. The artist’s reputation is important to the piece’s valuation, as if it were an unestablished artist who created this piece, the work likely would be regarded as “low” art. Art valuation is subjective--beauty is in the eye of the beholder--and in a post modern era, we can observe the shift in creativity and type of art, as artists push the envelope in discussion of ‘what is art’ and, more importantly, ‘what is good art.’ As post modern artists, like Jeff Koons or Maurizio Cattelan, create works that can be regarded as kitsch or cheep, they shape the narrative regarding our perception of art. Why do we value some art so highly and regard other works as ‘junk’? I think it has to do with the intentionality behind the work, and the dialogue it creates.

If it is truly so easy to do, why has no one done it before? The value of this art piece comes not from the value of its materials, but the value in the idea. It is not just a banana taped to the wall, but a symbol of the impermanence and a commentary on the commodification of art. Anything can be art, and Cattelan explores that with this piece. Art is valuable because someone thinks it is. In my opinion, this work is just as valuable and worthy of its 6 million dollar price tag as any other art that has sold for 6 million dollars.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that the context of the artwork influences its perceived value and meaning to a large extent. The controversy surrounding the price of the object gives more meaning to what the artwork represents more than the artwork itself. The art by Maurizio Cattelan challenges the idea of what art is. The banana is easily replicable, shown by the replacing of the banana when it was eaten, and yet fetches a high price usually only associated with art that has some sort of talent or skill used in the production of it. Perhaps the absurdity of the price for what it is makes the item more alluring, raising the price, which affirms the artworks message more.

I think that Mauizio Cattelan's reputation as an artist and the media coverage surrounding the initial pricing of Comedian contributed heavily towards it's valuation of millions of dollars. Maurizio Cattelan's fame surrounding making strange art like America and A Perfect Day, led to the high pricing of the art. If someone with little to no fame had produced this artwork, It's chances of being in an art gallery and being worth millions of dollars would be very low.

I Believe that Comedian does not warrant its price, as it can be easily produced, and to most people, might be worth more as food than as art. I think that its more likely that the buyers of this artwork bought it not because they actually liked it, but more because they wanted to be known as the person that had bought a banana for such a ridiculous price. I personally would not buy an artwork unless it was aesthetically pleasing or meant something to me, so I don't think that the price is warranted.

# data[].attributes.body
To a great extent, the context of this artwork influences its perceived value and meaning. Its context is that it’s an art piece made for the purpose of giving commentary on the value we give to objects. The artwork’s influence as a conceptual piece connects to its meaning. Conceptual pieces are more than what you see, like the Comedian being a commentary on value. People see the meaning of the artwork, influencing how much value people are willing to put on the piece.

If an artist's reputation is good and high, the media coverage of their art can cause market dynamics to go up. Cattelan was already a well-known artist, his pieces having a good amount of coverage already, causing his creations to be highly valued. Media coverage of the Comedian caused the bidding on it to be high, and the value inside the market dynamics went up.

Conceptual art, to me, is an interesting sub-category of art. It helps artists communicate their feelings and work through an art form, and I think that’s good. But, in my opinion, the Comedian doesn’t warrant the large price tag. I feel that it’s ironic how something satirical became what it was meant to convey. The conceptual piece works, but at the end of the day, it’s just a banana that anyone can buy from their local grocery store, all taped up.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that in most cases context is everything for a situation to make sense and be coherent. In cases like this, the reputation of the artist does not matter since other less-known artists would have made the art piece a lot less valuable having a more biased debate. For instances, if the artist would not have access to a broad audience who were willing to pay those prices for other of their pieces the situation would have been different, achieving different results and responses.

While there is some controversy regarding the situation, I think that this goes further because of economics. Although the price might have seen unreasonable, emphasizing the fact that it is simply a banana and duct tape sparks curiosity attracting more potential customers for the artist while unintentionally increasing its price by searching it up even if they are not planning on buying it.

Due to the fact that the materials are cheap and there is a paper stating that the banana can be replaced, many people with money might seek it for various reasons. It is common to buy art, wait for their price to increase, and then donate it to a museum, especially wealthy people who owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes to the government, utilizing art pieces as tax deductible donations. Another point to consider financially is how easy it is to recreate and "resell" to others, it can be as simple as purchasing a duct tape and 10 bananas for around $20, make copies of the authentication documents and reselling the new art pieces to ten different people while making millions of dollars in revenue with no proof of falsification as the is nothing to copy as opposed to sculptures and paintings with complex and hart to recreate techniques.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of this artwork greatly influences its perceived meaning and value to a great extent. "Comedian" is only a banana and a piece of tape without the context that surrounds it. The context leads the "Comedian" to be an object that sparks conversation about creativity and value. The artist's reputation contributes to the valuation of conceptual art pieces like "Comedian", as people see pieces from prestigious artists as "better" then some other pieces of artwork. They have a reputation, which leads to people believing that anything that the artist creates is prestigious, even if it is something simple like "Comedian". Media coverage also contributes to the valuation of art pieces as the more an art piece is displayed, the more attraction it gets. This would lead to more people wanting to see the art, leading it to become "prestigious" and well-known. I believe that "Comedian" does not warrant a multimillion-dollar price tag, as its only because of the artist that it has such prestige and is regarded as something valuable. At the end of the day, it is just a banana taped to a wall, something that many people can create.

# data[].attributes.body
Comedian’s context influences its perceived value and meaning to a great extent. Since this art piece was heavily publicized and brought in many clients, editions were made and priced at 10x the original price of comedian, which made more controversies rise. In my opinion, competition between clients (and or) potential buyers assisted in increasing the portrayed value and meaning of the piece. While there is no artistic value in the banana, the value comes from the popularity and its attached cultural phenomenon via social media.

Artist Maurizio’s reputation has already been set prior to Comedian, so his art has been widely noticed and judged. Being a well-known contemporary artist already brings in opportunities to promote your art, but with a piece that brings up many perspectives and curiosity, buyers see it as a chance to be a part of history. With the continuous increase in the price of Comedian, more debates about its value rose. In my opinion, the conversations and confusion about Comedian made it very costly.

Comedian does not warrant its $6.5 million price tag. Personally, I would not spend my money on this type of art in general and in consideration of people’s preferences, I can see why they are willing to spend millions of dollars on it. If I had that kind of money, I still would not be able to justify that purchase despite its fast-growing fame. I could definitely buy more valuable art with that money rather than something that would cost me a small fry from a fast-food place.

# data[].attributes.body
The real value of Maurizio Cattelan’s Comedian is within the context, not the object. Physically, the work is only a banana and a piece of duct tape; nothing makes these objects valuable or notable. However, the piece was able to amass a value of $6.2 million. This phenomenon occurred not because of the nature of the work, but by the value those around it attributed to it. This context is unique to the work and includes the questions it has provoked, such as what constitutes art, and what gives art its value. Additionally, the notoriety of the work as being “not true art” has only added to its prolificness and driven its demand upwards. The value of the piece is influenced by this cultural context, leading the work to be more desirable for its consumers. Furthermore, this influence is achieved to a high extent due to the normality of the objects included in the piece, and how this contrasts the value it has amassed. These two factors are far from equivalent to each other, leading us to the conclusion that there must be some contributing factor to the art’s value (this being the aforementioned context of the work.) In my opinion, the value of the work is not within the art, but with what it represents. Comedian is representative of the age-old question of what defines art, however, I believe that there are better examples, such as Fountain by Duchamp. If I had to spend $6.2 million on a controversial art piece, that would be my pick. That said, both Fountain and Comedian are valid and important works that represent questions about the parameters and validity of art. In my opinion, if a large number of people who presumably recognize the significance of Comedian have collectively agreed that it has a large monetary value, it deserves it.

# data[].attributes.body
Comedian’s context greatly influenced its perceived value and meaning by engaging with an art-historical movement and forcing its audience to question what makes art art. When this art piece is sold, it does not include a banana and duct tape but rather a manual on how to make the art piece and a certificate of authenticity. It is important to understand that this artwork can be made by anyone with tape, a banana, and a wall. By demonstrating this, Maurizio Cattelan made a statement saying that it is the concept that makes something art. According to a reporter, this piece “offers insight into how we assign worth.” Cattelan’s reputation heavily influenced this piece’s popularity, as a few years prior, he made a satirical art piece: a functioning, solid gold toilet. Media coverage and an artist’s reputation heavily inflate the value of conceptual art pieces. When an art piece goes viral, people look into the artist behind the piece, and when an artist has popular pieces that are similar, people put a higher value on the art piece and look in-depth at the art piece and its real-world context. In a world where the context behind an art piece is important, conceptual art that doesn’t make sense at first glance becomes very valuable when an artist puts a meaning behind it. Art is subjective, so when an artist creates a piece with a concept that may not be seen right away by viewers, I think it adds value to the piece because, while not everyone may find it appealing, those who can grasp the concept behind the art will hold the piece in high regard. In my opinion, conceptual art holds a higher value than most art, but I do not believe that Comedian should have been sold for 6.2 million dollars. While it does address the concept of the inequalities of how we assign value, if the art can be reproduced with only a certificate of authenticity, the price tag should not have jumped from $120,00 to $6.2 million. Media coverage allowed the value to be so inflated that its context in the world went from being a satirical view of worth and a piece of an art-historical movement to an overhyped banana taped to a wall as a grab for fame.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of the artwork Comedian influenced its perceived value and meaning to a high extent. The value of the artwork is based on the fact that it is in a capitalist society and is using some of the lowest value objects possible. In our modern world, which is surrounded by advanced technology, a society of memes and the internet, and the societal expectation of more being better, mass consumption of complex goods using lots of money is the norm and is what is perceived to be the ‘best’ way of living. The way that it ignores the price tags that are supposed to dictate quality highly changes its meaning to critique our society and its value as a critique.

The artist’s reputation, media coverage, and market dynamics have a huge effect on the valuation of conceptual art pieces because the artist can help dictate if the art means something. Cattelan’s public perception and history as a prankster-provocateur bring more attention to this artwork because people have the expectation that it should mean something, bringing much of the public to view this in a high light, even though it is just a banana and duct tape. In addition, media coverage of the ‘strange’ and ‘unusual’ can help bring attention to pieces like this because it hyper focuses on their uniqueness and what it could mean, thus drawing attention from the people that view this class of material, meaning that a target audience is reached.

I do not believe that Comedian warrants a multi-million-dollar price tag in the slightest way. It is simply a banana and a piece of duct tape, nothing extraordinary nor directly educating in the slightest. The main way to absorb the ideas of the piece are by observing the context around it, which can be achieved by viewing it without buying it. It’s message does not require buying it to satisfy the message, and it is rather a hypocritic as it is supposed to acknowledge wealth inequality in a sense and then is being sold for an outrageous price. If it wanted to be true to its message, it should’ve been free to the public and able to be bought by anyone.

# data[].attributes.body
To a great extent the way artwork is presented in the context of where it is will definitely influence how the art is perceived in its value and meaning. The Banana artwork Comedian by Maurizio Cattelan creates meaning out of context of an object, that being a banana he taped to a wall. The factors of the artists presence in art, media coverage, and marketing dynamics influence the valuation of conceptual art such as Comedian.

Cattelan is a renowned artists in the contemporary scenery. Having sold famous works over the millions of dollars such as his work America (2016), a gold toilet sold for $6 million. Before 2019 and the reputation of the Banana he already has established himself a popular presence around the contemporary arts. But how he establishes them is from his prankster-like and provocative art. His personality garners traction to the banana uplifting its value as an artwork.

This could only be done through the media coverage over his thoughtless banana. Mass media has called him a prankster and a joke to the art culture, but many others praise his art calling him a genius and understanding the questioning of arts subjective definition. The media has covered both good and bad on how the art Comedian is being interpreted by society. with headlines making it out of context for what the banana represents. Without media, the banana wouldn't gain fame, in which would increase its value. But the context of meme culture being used is how people are invested.

In this era, shock content has been used to capture the peoples attention and with meme-culture, it engages their minds to ridiculous events such as the rise of fame of Comedian. The market dynamics have shifted through meme-culture. With shock content being a significant attention grabber, the engagement the art gets reinforces the value and creates a significant meaning for the art piece. As now more people are questioning the banana the context of its perceived knowledge doesn't become useless, but now, as a cultural symbol. For me, how I see this art work is genius, relating back to Duchamp's Fontaine art piece 100 years ago, it criticizes how we make perceive art. It deserves it million dollar price tag? although the rich use it as a tax excuse, the way it jogs open interpretation from mass people is how it became a renowned artwork.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of the artwork heavily influences its perceived value by the public as they glorify this seemingly simple piece of art by making it extremely expensive which increases its value. The more expensive an object is, the more exclusive it becomes, therefore increasing its value as competition for the object rises. The more attention the piece of art attracted, the more its value rose as more people acknowledged the privilege of owning it by increasing its cost. The piece of art is just a banana taped onto a wall, but once you consider the fact that it was made by a famous artist who hadn’t produced any new art (at least for the public) in 15 years, its value increases. Once you consider the context, the meaning of the object is affected. The context of this artwork influences its perceived value and meaning to a great extent as it alters the way you view the artwork by making it more exclusive, which therefore increases competition for it, which will continue to increase its perceived value.

These factors contribute to the valuation of conceptual art pieces by increasing the competition for them as they become more exclusive with marketing dynamics and more famous by media coverage. The artist's reputation also influenced how the public viewed the artwork seeing as he has had several other famous works that were deemed prized and invaluable. And because he hadn’t published anything new in 15 years, the public was more inclined to want it because his work has been harder to come by since he’s stopped producing as regularly as he had when he first gained fame. These factors contributed to the valuation of conceptual art pieces by increasing competition for them and therefore making these pieces increasingly valuable.

I believe it doesn’t deserve to be so costly, but I acknowledge the influence the media and the public has on the price so I understand why it would be priced as such considering their contribution. I understand why it would be priced so high seeing as the paradigm of the art world has allowed for seemingly simple artwork to be worth millions of dollars, which is seen as reasonably priced to the knowers who understand the rules of this community. I don't think that this piece of art should be priced the way it is, as I am not a part of this community of knowers which values conceptual art to this extent, but I understand why others would see this as a reasonable price.

# data[].attributes.body
This art piece tests the limits of modern art. Its unique and slightly absurd nature sets it apart and makes it an essential part of today’s pop culture. The art lovers who appreciate this pieces message of expanding the horizons of what is capable in art will recognize it as something very valuable however, others who simply see this piece of work as a banana taped to a wall and nothing more may not have the same sense of its value—they may find it worthless. The artist has a reputation of creating very unique pieces of art, so Comedian was not much of a surprise for anyone. The incredibly extensive media coverage over this piece of art made it even more significant for pop culture because it had such an impact on society. People were in disbelief when they heard about the amount of money that people were giving for this piece and made it even more of a spectacle than it already was. Additionally, the opportunity for individuals to buy this artwork using cryptocurrency made them feel more inclined to spend their money on this piece of art and this factor further attributed to being incredibly modern and ingenious. I do not believe that Comedian is worth millions of dollars because I simply see it as something that I can make on my own at home with materials that I can easily buy from the store. I believe that it is art because it is inspired by the artist's own ideas of what modern art can look like and it’s his way of pushing those boundaries. However, I prefer art that has more of an emotional tie to it and seems to be more complex. I believe that the effort put into art determines its value.

# data[].attributes.body
The artwork "Comedian" is heavily dependent on its context for its perceived meaning and value. If we look at it with abstract bases and remove the context behind the work, what is left with a grocery store banana taped to a white plain surface. This viewpoint is confirmed on Inside Edition in their news report called "Banana Duct-Taped to Wall Sells for $6.2 Million." In 1:36 minutes into their video, they go to New York and interview people on the street and show their version of the artwork. Being randomly shown to people without the background behind the piece or its creator, many said they wouldn't buy it, and especially not for 6 million dollars. The things that gave value to the piece were the artist, the artist's reputation, the title, and the media coverage. First, the Artist was able to come up with the unique idea of putting a tapped banana for display, then giving the title "Comedian," giving value and meaning to the artwork, for the audience was able to think further based on its name. Then the artist's reputation for making unique artwork, art that is out of the ordinary, and lasty probably one of the most important factors was the media coverage, being spread online made the piece increase its popularity and knowarity. Now onto the question do I think about the Commidian, I think its a interesting piece with lots to explore. How to see the funny in normal everday things, how short things last, and how can something interesting become something great. The artwork the "Comedian" is one of a kind artwork and it revolutionises art making think and question what can art be? I would do the same and bu y it for 6 million for its truly marvelious.

# data[].attributes.body
To what extent does the context of this artwork influence its perceived value and meaning?

The artwork’s value and meaning depend entirely on the context of its presentation because the people’s perception and opinion are what give it worth. If the artwork was presented to a room of people who hated bananas, the artwork would have no value. Oppisetly, if the artwork is presented to a room of banana lovers, they would be much more likely to purchase it for a high value.

How do factors such as the artist’s reputation, media coverage, and market dynamics contribute to the valuation of conceptual art pieces like Comedian?

The artist’s reputation has the greatest impact because it can dictate things such as media coverage or market dynamics. An artwork made by a known and famous artist is much more likely to sell at a higher price because they have an established reputation for making good art. While the average person could accomplish what was done in the Comedian, their lack of other artworks makes it out of place and context. The artist’s fame and influence can contribute to how much media coverage they receive, because the media covers what is popular with the people. An artwork made by a more recognized artist will receive more coverage simply because more people care about it. Finally, the market dynamics of art depend on both the popularity of the artist as well as the demand for the artwork. A more popular artist means a more popular artwork, which means more demand and perceived value.

Reflect on your own views regarding the value of conceptual art. Do you believe Comedian warrants its multimillion-dollar price tag? Why or why not?

I don’t think Comedian warrants its multimillion-dollar price tag because it lacks uniqueness. I can understand paying for art that you truly perceive as beautiful, but why pay for something you can make yourself? There’s absolutely no reason to buy this artwork other than the prestige one might receive from public perception. Buying it is nothing more than a symbol of wealth.

(283 Words)

# data[].attributes.body
The perceived value and meaning of the artwork are significantly influenced by the context. The value of the "Comedian", which at its core, only costs a banana and a roll of duct tape. However, due to the excessive media coverage about the controversial artwork, the value of the Comedian skyrocketed because of the fact that people give an object more value based on how relevant the object to trending news. Value of the Comedian can also be contributed by the reputation of its artist. For example, Maurizio Cattelan is widely known for his subversive displays, which affected the perspectives of viewer and knowers into not only thinking about the artwork's value at the surface level but also the reasoning and deeper meaning behind it. In my opinion, I do not believe that the Comedian is actually worth 6.2 million dollars simply for the fact that it is not relevant to me. For avid artwork enjoyers, their interpreted value of the Comedian created by Maurizio Cattelan would increase as they decipher the hidden meaning behind it, however, as someone who doesn't really enjoy viewing art, may see the art piece as nothing more than a banana on the wall whose values was blow out of proportion. So, the perceived value of the comedian is influenced by the traits of the viewer and the context surrounding it like the amount of attention it receives and the artist who created it. If the Comedian was created by a random person, then rather being a multimillion-dollar art piece, it would have been trash.

# data[].attributes.body
The perceived meaning and value of Comedian is highly influenced by its context. This artwork challenges traditional art mediums by presenting a real banana pinned to a canvas with a strip of duct tape. Comedian is a commentary on the nature of our society and the value we put on objects. To an extremely wealthy person or an art lover who understands the meaning behind this work, the work is perceived as much more valuable than someone who sees it simply as a banana and duct tape. The artist’s reputation, along with media coverage, heavily contributes to the valuation of conceptual art pieces such as Comedian. This type of art is what artist Maurizio Cattelan specializes in. He has even taped a person to a wall for an art show. Before he came out with this piece, Cattelan was known for his funky, surprising artworks, which held similar narratives and commentaries on societal norms to Comedian. People put more value of this piece purely because of Cattelan’s reputation as a successful artist. This piece was blasted all over social media. The amount of media coverage it received was shocking. Even more shocking was how its presence on social media increased its worth by millions of dollars. The piece became more and more exclusive and popular, intriguing the general public as well as potential buyers who sought to perhaps gain fame from the purchase. People deemed the work more valuable because it was popular, and it sparked conversation. Although Comedian holds value, I do not believe it is necessarily monetary value. I would never purchase this piece of art, let alone for millions of dollars. However, I believe it is important to our society. It sparks controversy and conversations about capitalism and how “art” should be defined in a world where lines are even more blurred.

# data[].attributes.body
To a great extent, the context surrounding the art piece Comedian influences its value to increase due to the era in which the piece was created. As the piece was created in the digital age of virality and memes, Comedian had the ability to be spread on social media platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. This contrasts to pieces made outside of the digital age such as the Mona Lisa, which relied heavily on its intricate strokes and impressive realism rather than its meme-ability. Maurizio Cattelan had already established himself as a prankster in the art world, creating several humorous pieces such as Ostrich – a taxidermy ostrich– and A Perfect Day, in which Cattelan taped his dealer to the wall of the studio. Expensive, well known art pieces such as these built Cattelan's reputation and increased the value of his piece Comedian. Additionally, the rise of cryptocurrency and Bitcoin made those in the search of art pieces to be more generous with their money. This affected the purchase of the Comedian, as it was first bought by Justin Sun, founder of the cryptocurrency Tron, which was at its peak. This meant he was willing to bid more money and ended up paying the costly price of $6.2 million. In my personal opinion, the piece Comedian does not warrant the price when standing alone, however, the context that surrounds it such as its virality drastically increases the value. This idea is not only restricted to Comedian, but applies to many expensive bidding items. For example, a vintage comb may sell for only $20-30, but if the comb was discovered to have been used by Marilyn Monroe, the price would drastically increase due to the context surrounding it.

# data[].attributes.body
Knowledge Question: To what extent does the context of this artwork influence its perceived value and meaning?

The art piece Comedian shows that not all artwork is valued for the physical object itself, but rather for the context and meaning attached to it. In this case, the audience plays a key role in giving the work meaning, by glorifying the piece and giving it intense media attention, the public helped elevate its cultural and monetary value. The simplicity of the artwork, combined with its outrageous price tag, generated even more public fascination, creating a cycle where increased attention led to increased value. The fact that Comedian is made from two common household items – a banana and duct tape – surprised and even angered many, prompting questions about what qualifies as art. But this very shock factor is what gave the piece its significance.

The artist, Maurizio Cattelan, is known for his satirical and provocative work. His reputation for challenging artistic norms made it possible for something so ordinary to be perceived as high art. Additionally, the unique marketing strategy contributed to its value: rather than selling the banana itself, Cattelan sold a certificate of authenticity. This means the artwork is not the physical banana, but the idea of the banana on the wall, emphasizing that in conceptual art, the concept holds more value than the object.

Personally, I don’t believe the art piece justifies its extreme price tag. When I buy something, I care about the actual item, not just a certificate that says I own it. It's similar to the trend of NFTs, where people paid for the rights to an image that anyone could still screenshot and use. In the same way, anyone can tape a banana to a wall, but owning a certificate that claims it as a unique artwork doesn't hold much value to me. While others might find meaning or status in owning the concept, I see it more as a symbolic gesture than something truly worth thousands of dollars.

# data[].attributes.body
To what extent does the context of this artwork influence its perceived value and meaning?

The extent to the context that “Comedian” influences its perceived value and meaning truly depends on the person’s perspective on what is significant. To the general audience, you may need a lot of context behind it because many will find this piece of art as worthless and cheap due to the fact that you can find any of these products in any local market, such as Walmart. However, many people who are wealthy will need less context because they are in search of a different form of art, and have perceived this work to be significant due to the time, thought process, and effort into coming up with a specific design that many would not have thought of.

The artist, Maurizio Cattelan, is best known for satirical sculptures, in which he often incorporates hyperrealism and dark humor, as well as his work in the art world. He has already been known famously before creating his “Comedian” and stated that he had spent a year wondering what he should do to make the banana look as realistic as possible. After creating “Comedian”, he decided to release it everywhere on social media, and it gained much attention. He would constantly reupload to maintain a present status and work very well. Many news articles decided to post about this strange piece of art due to the simplicity, strangeness, and popularity that Maurizio was calling art. Maurizio was very fortunate to have created this artwork post-COVID-19 covid-19 since many people invested money into cryptocurrency and were moving away from physical money to contactless forms of payment. The cryptocurrency market flourished during this time, and many became wealthy from it, like Justin Sun. So, these events helped “Comedian” become so successful and sell way beyond its expected amount.

If I had the option to buy “Comedian”, I most likely would not. I do not believe that this artwork should be worth its multimillion-dollar price tag because I feel like the design of the thought process is very skeptical. Though Mauricio states that he spent a year coming up with and thinking about this thought process, I do not believe he spent a year thinking about how to duct tape a banana onto a white wall. Also, if I had this kind of money, I feel like I would donate it instead, rather than spend it on a cheap piece of art.

# data[].attributes.body
The extent of the content on this art creates it whole story and all of importance. The art was intended to create controversy and create discussion in the world of art. The media is what MADE the art. A banana taped to a wall is something anyone can do at home. The context of the production and why the artistic created it is important itself. The artists' dedication to having a "perfect" image of a banana and going through all mediums of art to replicate a banana. The artist grew his reputation extremely, as this art was very popular amongst the media. Though it can be seen as "lazy" or "overhyped", many consumers actually saw this piece humorous. This art was eventually sold for millions of dollars. Millions of dollars for a banana. Through the years of art culture, only this time would make something so strange and simple, so popular. I think this banana is a perfect example of today's modern art and will be demonstrated in art classes. I like this art because I think it something so new. It is nice to see something different and gives a new Lense of art. The meaning of "art" is so big and vague, and it is interesting to me to see people challenge tradition art standards. I do not think, no matter how much money I have, would spend that much on a banana. I think that even though this specific banana may be taught or talked about a little, it is a trend. I think that people will try to sell simple things for a crazy price, which will bring down the value and meaning of this original banana art.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of the artwork Comedian influences its perceived meaning and value to a great extent. The artwork Comedian itself without its context, it is just a banana taped to a wall with scotch tape, containing no actual value. However, with the artwork's context of its artist and the artist's thought process behind it, it gains its value of being an interesting object of conversation. The artist’s reputation can definitely bring value to the artwork for the people who observe it. The artist, Maurizio Cattelan is known for hyper realistic sculptures that combine with popular culture, meaning that he was trying to make it as realistic as possible using an actual banana. Media coverage can greatly contribute to the value of an artwork, because it can spread information about an artwork to many people around the world and allow for them to converse over their personal thoughts over the artwork. For the artwork Comedian, it had been displaced at galleries for viewing pleasure and for auctions; many people conversed over the artwork, and most of it had thought that Comedian was amazing, and some thought that it was ridiculous that a banana could be considered art, and then sell for a great amount of money. As more people, both on and off the internet learned about Comedian, and see how popular the artwork has become, more people will want to know about the artwork and then more people will compete for the artwork, which would cause the price of the artwork to drive so high, where it would earn millions of dollars. In my opinion, no, I do not believe that Comedian warrants its multimillion-dollar price because the meaning behind it may not be the meaning or value that I or the person who buys the artwork believes it to be. I also do not believe that it is work millions of dollars, because it is a very simple thing, that itself does not bring any eye-opening news or viewpoint's over.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of Comedian is the perceived value. The individual objects of the banana and tape are worth nothing in the art community, but Cattelan and the media gave it a value that, to some, is equal to a mansion. This value comes from the attention surrounding Comedian and its absurdity. Social media exposed the piece to anyone who could access the internet and allowed people to give their opinions. Even though some of those opinions were negative, the attention meant that whoever bought the piece would be under that attention as well. It was also perceived as a commentary and challenge on what contemporary art is. Somebody buying the work might feel like they are participating in and contributing to the development of contemporary art. That, joined with the exclusivity and prestige that comes with owning a Cattelan art piece, gave it high value to some.

Cattalan’s reputation was vital to the piece’s success because it put credibility behind it. Someone who had no name in the art community would be inconsequential to the debate over contemporary art, and a low effort artwork like Comedian would not have any impact. Media coverage was just as much a part of the artwork as the actual banana and tape. Comedian was about the debate and the shock/outrage. If there was no audience of people to react to the banana, it would have lost its worth as a challenge to contemporary art. I also do think that there are some ultra rich people out there who have more money than they know how to spend. The piece could have been anything and still found success because the rich people buying it aren't looking for pretty art. They're looking for attention and entertainment, and maybe to have an impact.

I honestly kind of think Comedian was worth all the money. I think the entire situation is the artwork and I’m glad it was able to spark conversation about the qualities of “real art”. I don’t think I could ever spend more than five dollars on a banana and tape, but I’m not deep in the art scene or the mega rich people scene. I do think this is the kind of stunt that can’t really, or shouldn't really, be recreated. I think the art of it is the absurdity of the situation and the piece's surprising success.

# data[].attributes.body
The art is perceived through an artistic lens, whereas if we saw this piece on the street we wouldn't think it was worth so much money. the context of the piece of art being in a profound Art museum begs the audience to ask questions about why this is art and why Maurizio Cattelan chose to create this piece of art. His reputation as an artists is a factor that contributes to his fame and the price of his work. his pervious works of art could go for up to 9 million dollars. the art was put on tee shirts and advertised by Cattelan's crew. the Comedian is not just a banana, but a connection between Art, memes, and cryptocurrency. many famous artists of the modern day believe that this will become part of history. Personally, i think that the Comedian is not worth 6.2 million dollars, maybe a couple hundred thousand but even then, the materials are maybe worth 3 dollars. even then i would not buy this piece of art since art is not as important to me than others.

# data[].attributes.body
The context of this seemingly very simple piece of art which is just a regular duct taped banana is that it was made by a well-known artist and put in a famous destination. If this banana were to just be seen duct taped to the ground outside it would be perceived as if it were worth nothing and it was just trash on the ground. It being put in a famous art museum raised questions which caused one person to want it, and when one person wanted it then more wanted it, until its value skyrocketed then just continued to climb. Maurizio created this artwork as a statement peace that portrayed a message. Media coverage can heavily impact the worth of any piece of are, the more this piece of art was popularized it became a sensation that’s value stayed high. I think a lot of the time that conceptual art tends to be over inflated. This does not necessarily mean that the art is not worth nothing, I just do not think that the idea behind The Comedian warranted the value that it was eventually given. Conceptual art is important though as it solidifies that the worth of art is very much affected by coverage, location, and also how famous the creator of the art is.

# data[].attributes.body
Comedian is heavily influenced by the context of modern art, both in its perceived value and meaning. Modern art is regarded by some as niche and unskilled work, being ridiculed by people who enjoy works that are more classical and visually impressive. Comedian utilizes this expectation to further emphazise its message, without having any flashy visual effects. It also changes its perceived value for some, as it becomes a characterization of the modern art world, viewed as soulless and exploitative of the art industry.

The artist's reputation and media coverage of the piece highly increase its value, as without the artist's preexisting reputation as a commentator on modern capitalism and the widespread irresponsibility of people with power, the work would not have been analyzed enough to find a deeper meaning, rather being discarded. Media coverage also helped, as it was at "the most Instagrammable" art show, boosting its popularity and value significantly. Market dynamics may have affected the valuation of the artwork somewhat, but the other two factors held significantly more sway over the actual valuation of Comedian.

Personally, I do not believe that art like Comedian warrants a multimillion dollar price tag. Regardless of the significance of the message behind it, I look for visual appeal when I want to purchase new art, and Comedian is highly lacking in that regard. Even if it was by design, it just is not interesting enough where I would save up millions of dollars just to spend on an instruction manual.