Just Short of Being a Con Man, But No More Than Anyone in the Art World

March 14, 2017 11:38 AM

An artist who created precise drawings of money and then used them in actual transactions as a way to question notions of value, J.S.G. Boggs died [January 23rd] at a hotel in Tampa, Florida, according to friends and reports on social media. (ArtNet)

The Economist: His money or his art?
The Paris Review: One Fundred Dollars
NYT: J.S.G. Boggs, Artist, Dies at 62; He Made Money. Literally.
J.S.G. Boggs (Wikipedia)
Boggs: A Comedy of Values (Goodreads)


"Nobody knows what a dollar is, what the word means, what holds the thing up, what it stands in for. And that's also what my work is about. Look at these things, I try to say. They're beautiful. But what the hell are they? What do they do? How do they do it?" from "The Money Artist" (The Atlantic, 1999)

Previously.

posted by chavenet (13 comments total)

And of course, the thing that adds the coup de grace on the interplay of money and meaning is that I'm sure than any of the drawn bills they refused were worth far more if sold than than the bill they replaced was.
posted by tavella at 11:55 AM on March 14, 2017 [3 favorites]

.

My Dad was always fascinated by his work and hoped to own one.
posted by irisclara at 12:03 PM on March 14, 2017 [2 favorites]

This reminds me of Kurt Vonnegut's novel "Bluebeard," in which aspiring artist Rabo Karabekian's mentor has him reproduce a bill (can't remember the denomination). When he finally presents the mentor with an entirely convincing reproduction, he runs off as if to spend it, and the mentor gives chase so he doesn't get arrested for counterfeiting.
posted by ejs at 12:12 PM on March 14, 2017 [1 favorite]

.
Questioning notions of value indeed. Lawrence Weschler's book on Boggs, cited above, is well worth reading.
posted by LeLiLo at 1:45 PM on March 14, 2017 [1 favorite]

.

Such a great conceptual artist.
posted by mondo dentro at 2:32 PM on March 14, 2017 [1 favorite]

I find that the most fascinating aspect of philately is the fact that government banknotes, stamps, and coins are art, but they are entirely political art. Everything on the banknote is there because the government wants it there. I, too, recommend Lawrence Weschler's book because of the way Boggs seems to find more and more ways to transgress everyone's assumptions.
posted by Multicellular Exothermic at 3:05 PM on March 14, 2017 [2 favorites]

Damn. That's too bad. I read the 1999 book about him and got in touch with him about building a web site for him in exchange for one of his bills but he declined saying that part of his method was that he had to initiate the transaction. I hated that he was a stickler but really loved his work.

RIP.
posted by You Should See the Other Guy at 3:19 PM on March 14, 2017 [3 favorites]

I too had hoped to own one. Read about him in the New Yorker, from Lawrence Weschler's book (linked to via goodreads above).

.
posted by dougfelt at 8:22 PM on March 14, 2017

.
posted by From Bklyn at 1:42 AM on March 15, 2017

I find that the most fascinating aspect of philately is the fact that government banknotes, stamps, and coins are art, but they are entirely political art.

Benard Von Nothause was only charged once he created the "Ron Paul Dollar" for his "Liberty Dollar". Right now there is a "Trump Dollar" I believe he is behind (VS the spammed "Trump $2 bill")

He's not promoting the Trump-thing as an alternative to FRN'sm nor is he giving advice on how to use the Trump-coin as tender in writing then doing what he says not to do in a promotional video so learning HAS occurred.
posted by rough ashlar at 1:45 AM on March 15, 2017

.
posted by tychotesla at 3:45 AM on March 15, 2017

Thanks for the pointer to Weschler's book, which I just finished. Interesting & thought-provking, but I was left wondering about one thing:

Boggs said that he often had success with middle-manager people: those who had a "slush fund" of assets that they could give away. For example, a restaurant manager can accept one of Boggs's bills because s/he could comp a meal for nothing, and with little oversight. But even for somebody like that, what about the return of change?

I imagine it would be much harder to pass a $20 drawing for a $4 meal, than a $50 drawing for a $47 meal. So I'd like to know more about the "change" part of the transaction -- perhaps that's the proper measure of the worth a recipient ascribes to the drawing.

However, as a small business owner and consequently a person who can give away stuff if I feel like it, I would have been delighted to receive one of his drawings in payment. Hell, I have plenty of deadbeat clients -- I'd be happy to receive anything at all from them.
posted by spacewrench at 1:57 PM on March 19, 2017

I believe his dollar value was usually just above the value of goods. I haven't read the book in 18 years but I don't recall him trying to use $100 bills to pay for $10 items. There are a number of vids about him on Youtube and they're all within a few dollars, change-wise.
posted by You Should See the Other Guy at 11:02 PM on March 19, 2017