Fine Art America - Art - Prints - Canvas Prints - Framed Prints - Metal Prints - Acrylic Prints

Every purchase includes a money-back guarantee.








Fine Art Discussions

Keyword Search  | Main Menu

Search Discussions


I Think I'll Take Up Painting,anybody Have A Lear Jet I Can Borrow?

Posted by: Rich Franco on 05/01/2013 - 6:07 PM

Just when you thought us humans had run out of ways to pollute the planet, some "princess" comes up with this!




Oldest Reply

Posted by: Barbara Griffin on 05/01/2013 - 6:12 PM

See the first comment on the piece "Ah, typo in the headline... you used the word art by mistake"


Posted by: Dan Turner on 05/01/2013 - 6:12 PM

The result she's showing in photo 8 is gorgeous! I like everything about this.

Dan Turner
Dan Turner Fine Art
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online
To Enjoy Dan Turner's Pinterest Boards, Click Here


Posted by: Wendy J St Christopher on 05/01/2013 - 6:19 PM

Very Pollock-esque!

I agree with Dan. That finished work is wonderful. :-)


Posted by: Penny Hunt on 05/01/2013 - 6:20 PM

Who knew? Amazing!


Posted by: Nature's Details on 05/01/2013 - 6:24 PM

If she was not a "princess", this would go nowhere.


Posted by: Jeff Kolker on 05/01/2013 - 6:36 PM

Do like the end result in #8...


Posted by: Dan Turner on 05/01/2013 - 6:38 PM

Just the way it was done adds a few thousand to each piece.

Ordinary art opening: "How'd you do that?"
"I threw paint at the canvas."

Princess Tarinan von Anhalt art opening: "How'd you do that?"


"I SAID I GOT A LEAR JET AND oh....very funny."

Dan Turner
Dan Turner Fine Art
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online
To Enjoy Dan Turner's Pinterest Boards, Click Here


Posted by: Viktor Savchenko on 05/01/2013 - 6:46 PM

It is more about process than painting.
Nothing is new there,
we all do splashes.
Just read this post from beginning!


Posted by: Rich Franco on 05/01/2013 - 6:53 PM

I thought of excesses when I posted this, not the finished product. I like the end result, but if I could afford it, I would never purchase it and condone how and why she does this. Throwing buckets of paint at a canvas, could achieve the same results, right? Just have to factor in the height of the building and velocity! No pollution and waste!!!

Pollock??? Give me a break!



Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/01/2013 - 6:57 PM

A princess might be how she got on the internet - but jackson pollock was no prince (charming or otherwise) and it's the same principle.

and I agree with Dan on this one - nice art work.


Posted by: Rich Franco on 05/01/2013 - 7:17 PM


I'm not critiquing the the result, only the method. Is the result worth the method?



Posted by: Patricia Strand on 05/01/2013 - 7:19 PM

I actually like the photos of her process better than the paintings! The painting in number 8 looks doctored, to me.


Posted by: Patricia Strand on 05/01/2013 - 7:21 PM

Rich, that's kind of what I was thinking, too. The end result isn't anything so fabulous as to need a lear jet to achieve.


Posted by: Christine Till on 05/01/2013 - 7:22 PM

#8 is awesome!

However, it's neither original nor new ... she just continues what her late husband Jurgen von Anhalt has started.


Posted by: Viktor Savchenko on 05/01/2013 - 7:24 PM

I am with Patricia.
Remarkable work of photographer (AP Photo/J Pat Carter)
introduces us to style of painting everybody can do, assuming you pay for gas.


Posted by: Viktor Savchenko on 05/01/2013 - 7:28 PM

In Starry Night artists definitely used some kind of blower
Photography Prints


Posted by: Lynn Palmer on 05/01/2013 - 7:29 PM

Eight is nice enough but I'm much more enamored by the photos taken of the paint frozen in mid air. Like others suggested, it seems like a jet engine wasn't absolutely necessary to create the images.


Posted by: Rich Franco on 05/01/2013 - 7:56 PM


Very surprised by reactions here about the resulting art, using probably the most wasteful and environmentally wrong way to create art! Are people that narcissistic that using a multi-million dollar jet and hundreds or thousands of gallons of jet fuel to produce a piece of "art" is acceptable? Don't we as artists, have some need and even a right and an obligation, to protect the landscapes and environments we paint or photograph. Should we just hope that this "princess" create schools all around the world and help spread this "new" way to create art?

Do we need to create new excesses for us, just becasue the final product is "kinda cool"???



Posted by: Tony Rodriguez on 05/01/2013 - 8:45 PM

actually like the photos of her process better than the paintings! ::: I rather enjoyed the photos of the paint in the air. More so than the finished work,


Posted by: Dan Carmichael on 05/01/2013 - 9:52 PM

Come on people, have mercy on the poor princess. Rich... privileged... bored... she doesn't have anything better to do with her life.


Posted by: Rich Franco on 05/01/2013 - 10:35 PM

Sorry all, thought this process of hers was offensive to us and Earth, but seems some still are condoning the use of the jet to fuel her art!

Don't care really how good the photography is of her paint being sprayed by a jet engine, that's just the math, but just surprised that artists don't see a basic problem with this "artist" using a jet to be her paint brush, which seems a little "overboard", to say the least. If we all started doing and creating art, that was good art maybe, but hurt ourselves, our children and the rest of the planet, would the art be worth the "expense"? That's my question,



Posted by: Jeff Kolker on 05/01/2013 - 11:02 PM

I say, it's her money, she can spend it as she wants. Would it be worth it to me? No... but I wouldn't want to be told how to spend my own personal funds. And, I do think the earth will survive her little endeavor.


Posted by: Roger Swezey on 05/01/2013 - 11:12 PM

Gee, I thought the plane was in flight....Can you imagine the amazing contrails!!


Posted by: OTIL ROTCOD on 05/01/2013 - 11:25 PM

A very expensive way to create an artwork. The lifestyle of the rich and the famous. The jet is not the clincher, I think the price of the finished work would be very expensive. Besides the outcome is beautifully done. And she wouldnt find it hard to sell it to her fellow royalties, or billionair friends. Maybe we could do the same style guys, but instead of a learjet we could use an industrial fun. Who knows we might get the same result. LOL. Thanks Rich for the share.


Posted by: Dan Carmichael on 05/01/2013 - 11:48 PM

It's a gimmick,

It's genius PR,

She's probably in the news multiple times in multiple countries.

She's being talked about in forums everywhere,

And because of it she will:

1) sell her art

2) make lots more money than you do.

Move on.


Posted by: Christine Till on 05/01/2013 - 11:57 PM

I've seen worse ... like "art" created on the account of dying people and such.


Posted by: A Souppes on 05/02/2013 - 5:02 AM

I agree it just a PR but can one use space shuttle for this?


Posted by: Roger Swezey on 05/02/2013 - 7:02 AM

RE: Publicity Stunt

Let's get serious....Everything we put up on display on this site, whether it be a painting, photo, digital art, actual sculpture, etc. is in essence a publicity "stunt".


Posted by: Rebecca Sherman on 05/02/2013 - 7:44 AM

Performance art with a finished product. I think the whole thing is lovely and can imagine the roar of the engine and wind probably adds to the joy of the wet colors flying around.


Posted by: Tom Druin on 05/02/2013 - 9:50 AM

rich ... the key words are wasteful and environmentally wrong the fact she was in the process of creating art is of no importance .you create a piece of art using all of the most enviromentally sound products you can it turns out fantastic now you live in florida, i live in africa i order a 24x36 canvas wrap how am i recieving that between processing and shipping who knows how many planes,trains and automobiles it is going to take to get me that canvas wrap .


Posted by: A Souppes on 05/02/2013 - 11:01 AM

those of you who think this is art just stop pretending and ask yourself if she paid $10 to a guy/girl from the street would end result be better or worse I think not. That's exactly how rich ppl see art if it someone famous even pisses on canvas it's a masterpeace...
I though more of you ppl...


Posted by: Philip Sweeck on 05/02/2013 - 11:15 AM

The Princess should try that with a Boeing 747.


Posted by: A Souppes on 05/02/2013 - 11:17 AM

Or RAF and USAF could do mass production of this "art"


Posted by: Ann Powell on 05/02/2013 - 2:25 PM

Very interesting discussion, I enjoyed reading all the viewpoints. I think she could have easily achieved the same end result without the jet fuel, with some other type of blower. But then the whole performance part of it would be missing. My first reaction was the irresponsible use of fuel and the environment. But, as someone touched upon, we do not think about the "carbon footprint" of other things, such shipping our canvas, or producing a movie, or even the manufacture and shipping of cameras, and the constant upgrade of our computers etc etc. ,Or all the jet fuel we manage to use around the world to kill one another......


Posted by: Wendy J St Christopher on 05/02/2013 - 2:37 PM

@ Ann -- Right on.

@ Rich -- Yes, Pollock! You're telling me you don't see the similarities? No worries; I won't try to convince you, if you don't.


Posted by: Rich Franco on 05/02/2013 - 3:20 PM


Of course I see the finished product has a similiar look, but he used house paint, alcohol and drugs to create his works, not some gimmicky excuse to burn jet fuel. Putting this "princess" in the same sentence as Pollock, just took me by surprise!

I've seen videos where apes and elephants "paint" by doing the same as she does, but no one would compare their finished product to Pollock!

As I mentioned above, I was just surprised when artists here condoned and supported her method, which after all is used by the owners of the company that leases these Lear jets.

And as far as the references to the "carbon foot print" things we do, as part of our every day life, doesn't really apply here, as opposed to where somebody is going out of their way to be excessive. What we do on a daily basis, generally has to be done, food needs to be shipped to stores and flights have to be taken for business or personal reasons, just part of life. What we do with the things we can control, is more important than some "artist" on a tarmac, throwing paint at a cavnas, which is just being done to get attention to FlexJet and their stockholders.

I just thought as artists, we would innately be "Greener" and opposed to silly antics like this example, but seems I was wrong, for the most part.

I can't see this going anywhere further without getting politics involved or personal attitudes brought up, so, I will close this discussion,



This discussion is closed.