Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Economics

"Bea Arthur Naked" Sells for $1.9 Million; "Bea Arthur Clothed" Worth Even More.

Nick Gillespie | 5.16.2013 8:11 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Yesterday at Christie's auction house, John Currin's 1991 painting, "Bea Arthur Naked," sold for $1.9 million.

From the catalog copy, which dilates a bit on Currin's adolescent fixation on The Golden Girls sitcom:

Creating a bold statement, Currin chose to strip his unwilling sitter of her garb-in an act reminiscent of Francisco de Goya's La maja vestida and La maja desnuda. Causing a stir among the contemporary female community, Arthur herself surmised, "Maybe he was attracted to the feminist movement of the 1970s," Bea Arthur speculated regarding her portrait, "because of Maude, I was the Joan of Arc of feminism. He certainly couldn't have done anything with Marlo Thomas of That Girl"

Arthur, who died in 2009 at the age of 86, was very funny.

Hat tip: The Daily Beast (whose post on the painting got banned from Facebook).

Related: "Why Stuffed Sharks Cost So Damn Much: The driving formces behind the 'curious economics of contemporary art." (The short answer: "insecure rich people who want 'prove to the rest of the world that they really are rich.'")

For those of you who doubt just how transformative a change agent Bea Arthur could be, please read "The Golden Girls: How One TV Show Turned a Generation of Boys into Homosexuals."

Take a trip back to a time when Norman Lear ruled the airwaves and Maude was ruling the roost in Tuckahoe, New York, with one of the greatest theme songs in history:

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Dalai Lama to Visit New Orleans

Nick Gillespie is an editor at large at Reason and host of The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie.

EconomicsCultureArtFeminism
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (88)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. WTF   13 years ago

    $1.9 million? Seriously? That painting doesn't even look very skillful to my (admittedly untrained) eye. Never mind that it's supposed to be Bea Arthur.

    1. Rich   13 years ago

      Well, you must admit, WTF, that the smile is more haunting than Mona Lisa's.

      1. Live Free or Diet   13 years ago

        Yeah, it's the smile... let's go with that.

      2. WTF   13 years ago

        If by 'haunting' you mean 'likely to induce nightmares', then yes, I see your point.

  2. db   13 years ago

    Has anyone ever noticed just how long Gillespie's torso is?

    1. Joe M   13 years ago

      I was going to say we could shine this image up into the sky to summon a certain person.

      1. Almanian!   13 years ago

        Carroll O'Connor?

  3. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

    Well, I'm gay now.

    1. Almanian!   13 years ago

      We're all gay now.

      /Newsweek

      1. Live Free or Diet   13 years ago

        I thought we were all communists now.

        1. darius404   13 years ago

          Wait, you guys weren't already gay communists (or gaymmunists) in disguise? Nothing makes sense here anymore.

  4. Joe M   13 years ago

    So glad I have images for this site blocked at work.

    1. Auric Demonocles   13 years ago

      Yeah. WTF is up with putting up a NSFW image as anything other than a link (with a NSFW tag)?

      1. Pro Libertate   13 years ago

        Back in the early days of Urkobold, a post like that got us classified as an adult site. One image. And, I must say, it was far less offensive.

  5. sarcasmic   13 years ago

    Nothing quite like old sagging tits.

    1. deified   13 years ago

      I wonder who Currin got B. Arthur to sit for this bad boy.

  6. Zombie Jimbo   13 years ago

    "Holy shit! I wouldn't fuck you with Bea Arthur's dick!"

    http://tvhowl.com/in-his-own-w.....is-career/

  7. Almanian!   13 years ago

    You can almost hear Johnny Longtorso fapping from here.....

    Which is disgusting.

    1. Longtorso, Johnny   13 years ago

      I can type with one hand, thankfully.

  8. Restoras   13 years ago

    Gillespie, you bastard, some things can't be unseen!

  9. Fluffy   13 years ago

    NSFW guys.

    1. db   13 years ago

      And most of the comments here are SFW? I stopped reading this place on my work computer years ago.

      1. UnCivilServant   13 years ago

        Comments aren't immediately visible from the next cube over.

        1. db   13 years ago

          Maybe not, but they're visible to your employer's content scanner. Although I'm not sure that any content scanner short of military strength could survive "Bea Arthur Naked." Is reason engaged in a covert campaign to destroy proxy servers?

          1. UnCivilServant   13 years ago

            Lucky me - I manage the content filter here (Among other things) and if the hueristics haven't blocked reason by now, I don't think they will.

            (We don't actually bother to check on what text is viewed online, just site reputation and category, blocking those that are 'unsuitable or malicious')

            1. Rich   13 years ago

              blocking those that are 'unsuitable or malicious'

              You let through those that are 'unacceptable'?

              1. UnCivilServant   13 years ago

                I do not actually set the policy, I only enforce it. That is what they pay me for. The overpriced appointees set the policy.

                1. gaijin   13 years ago

                  Does your policy include keywords such as 'Tea Party' or 'Patriot'? Are you just some low level functionary in the Cincinnati office?

            2. WTF   13 years ago

              You know, our content filter here blocks anything to do with firearms or even knives, but it lets this Bea Arthur Naked abomination right through.

              1. UnCivilServant   13 years ago

                I'd say that 'strangely' we have the same problem, but the people who set the internet policy were picked by die-hard anti-gun nuts like King Cuomo.

              2. Suthenboy   13 years ago

                "...our content filter here blocks anything to do with firearms..."

                Fuck them.

    2. Coeus   13 years ago

      No shit. Thank God I actually temporarily have my own office at the moment.

    3. darius404   13 years ago

      We're all very grateful for your warning. If any of the posters can time travel, I'm sure they'll notify their past selves not to look at the post.

  10. hamilton   13 years ago

    Well, good morning everybody. I see Nick is being a dick again.

    1. deified   13 years ago

      It's a close call but I would have to say that Good Times had a better theme song.

  11. Lord Peter Wimsey   13 years ago

    I think you got the story wrong. Someone was probably paid 1.9 mil to make sure all copies of the painting and the original are destroyed, and the artist is castrated so that he cannot pass on his genetic material.

    This sounds more likely.

    And can I just say that despite some real laughs and a few memorable shows, Normal Lear set the tone for arrogant, liberal hectoring in TV sitcoms. Every episode was meant to teach America a lesson about how intolerant we were. Go back and watch ALL IN THE FAMILY NOW. The "intelligent" comments from Gloria and Mike are hilarious.

    The cure for this disease was Seinfeld.

    1. deified   13 years ago

      Absolutely right on Norman Lear. He's almost as overrated at Norman Mailer or Norm Macdonald. Douches all.

    2. Jon Lester   13 years ago

      It was said that "Maude" didn't last longer on TV because the character was too much like the producers.

    3. Brandybuck   13 years ago

      I disagree. The first few episodes of AITF were great. Unfortunately Lear couldn't keep his lecturing out and it rapidly disintegrated.

  12. darius404   13 years ago

    I know it's on a site called "Christwire", but if I didn't know better, I'd think that article was a joke.

    1. PH2050   13 years ago

      It's satire, and they have some hilarious articles.

      http://christwire.org/2013/05/.....ans-lungs/

  13. UnCivilServant   13 years ago

    Okay, that almost got me in trouble when that image popped up as the first entry on the blog. Some warning would have been nice.

  14. Heroic Mulatto   13 years ago

    This exists.

    1. darius404   13 years ago

      Real porn, or a "porn" satire of the Golden Girls? I know which one it probably is, but I'm still holding onto some hope and faith in humanity here. It's ok to kill though, go right ahead.

      1. darius404   13 years ago

        *kill it

        1. db   13 years ago

          Sure you meant that.

      2. Heroic Mulatto   13 years ago

        Real porn, or a "porn" satire of the Golden Girls?

        It's both. It's from a whole series. Have you seen the Star Trek one? The sets and the uniforms are pitch perfect!

        1. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

          there's a neat doco on porn parodies - some have surprisingly high production values. Some Swedish dude did Apocalypse Climax starring his ex-wife as Kurtz which looked pretty good.

          "You don't have the right to judge me. You have the right to fuck me. But you don't have the right to judge me"

          It also featured a woman who made a porn parody tribute to David Lynch, which was... odd

    2. Suthenboy   13 years ago

      Good God HM, how would you even know that?

      Never mind, I dont want to know.

    3. PH2050   13 years ago

      Rule 34.

  15. Rufus J. Firefly   13 years ago

    Thanks, Nick. Here I am settling down with a bowl of Froot Loops (is that still legal?) and I have to see this? I don't know what's worse, the painting or that someone paid 1.9 for that.

    Who's next? Betty White?

    Title of painting: Heeeeeere's Maude!

    /Homer scream.

  16. Zombie Jimbo   13 years ago

    OT but someone seems pissed at the IRS:

    http://profootballtalk.nbcspor.....r-the-irs/

    1. Rich   13 years ago

      Who's next?

      1. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

        I have a Japanese pressing of that - not that anyone cares.

    2. Ted S.   13 years ago

      This already showed up in 24/7.

  17. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    the gogglez do nuthink.

    1. darius404   13 years ago

      "Only Fallout Boy can save me now."

      1. Rufus J. Firefly   13 years ago

        God that scene. Too much.

  18. Caleb Turberville   13 years ago

    I wonder what the Estelle Getty would go for?

  19. Rufus J. Firefly   13 years ago

    Those are some comments in the threads. Apologists for the IRS. Amazing. Speaking of apologists, where's Tony. The IRS needs some defense!

    1. UnCivilServant   13 years ago

      The IRS' defence is a strong offense. It needs no appologists.

  20. Zakalwe   13 years ago

    40 comments and no tedious John/Sarcasmic discussion of who would bang Bea Arthur? My faith in Hit and Run is growing.

    1. Restoras   13 years ago

      I don't think either one of them are into geriatrics - although Sarc probably would happily bang Kate Moss when she turns 70. Or any other age, for that matter.

      1. Caleb Turberville   13 years ago

        I read that as Carrie Ann Moss for some reason.

      2. sarcasmic   13 years ago

        When she turns 70, I'll be 71. So yeah. I would.

    2. sarcasmic   13 years ago

      Too skinny for John. Too old for sarc. Nothing to argue about.

    3. Old Bull Lee   13 years ago

      As a Team John guy, I was interested in seeing this discussion too.

      1. sarcasmic   13 years ago

        As a Team John guy

        For your fapping pleasure.
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem.....dvert.html

      2. #HOLO YOLO   13 years ago

        As a Team John guy

        I would like to formally disassociate myself with any sort of "Team Sarc"

  21. Rufus J. Firefly   13 years ago

    Ok, I'm gonna hijack here mostly because the opportunity may never arise. Serious question: Which cartoon is more referenced and used as a metaphor for life - The Simpsons or Loony Tunes? Throw in the The Flintstones if you want. Just the other day I made a reference to Peal Slaghoople to roaring giggles.

    1. Caleb Turberville   13 years ago

      Moon pie...What a time to be alive!

    2. Restoras   13 years ago

      Ricochet Rabbit? No, Magilla Gorilla. Yes, that's the one.

      Or, or....Starblazers?

      1. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

        +1 Argo

    3. Restoras   13 years ago

      No...wait...Gigantor?

  22. Rufus J. Firefly   13 years ago

    Pearl.

    1. db   13 years ago

      Necklace.

      1. gaijin   13 years ago

        that's not jewelry she's talkin bout.
        it really don;t cost that much

  23. DJF   13 years ago

    This price could only happen because of the FED and its money expansion policy.

    Helicopter Ben is probably the one who paid for the painting. Its going to be on the next $100 bill.

  24. SugarFree   13 years ago

    This is the way to start your day: exposure to the unbearably erotic.

    I wish Maude would have had my abortion.

    1. gaijin   13 years ago

      paging Dr. Gosnell.

  25. Caleb Turberville   13 years ago

    I think my favorite Golden Girls episode is the one where Dorothy has an abortion. Really touching.

  26. Suthenboy   13 years ago

    I am no prude, and if someone wants to paint Bea nude, thats fine with me. I acknowledge that it has artistic value, and value as social commentary. However, if I had gone all day without seeing this painting it would have been just fine with me.

    1. Harvard   13 years ago

      Bea's just proud she's (evidently) dropped a couple of hundred pounds.

  27. Timrek   13 years ago

    Still sexier than Rue McClanahan's strip tease in "Hollywood After Dark." I do like that on my face book page, where this article shows up because I've liked REASON, her breasts have black stars over the nipples. It makes her look like she's had a wardrobe malfunction.

  28. Radioactive   13 years ago

    MY EYES!!!! IT BURNS!!!

  29. AlmightyJB   13 years ago

    I'll be in my bunk.

  30. OldMexican   13 years ago

    Creating a bold statement, Currin chose to strip his unwilling sitter of her garb-in an act reminiscent of Francisco de Goya's La maja vestida and La maja desnuda.

    "Reminiscent" only because both models had their respective portraits done in the buff and clothed. But there's no denial that even with hairy armpits and possibly not very much in the way of personal hygiene (by today's standards), La Maja (the lady) was much, MUCH more attractive than someone who looks like the sister of a certain woman killed by a falling house from Kansas.

  31. Not a Libertarian   13 years ago

    Any nostalgia aside, was "Maude" really all that good? I watched a few episodes recently and the writing was so very thin. The lack of any continuity was irksome.

  32. Sam Grove   13 years ago

    There's the problem with large breasts. The bigger they are, the farther they fall.

  33. Ornithorhynchus   13 years ago

    Where did Deadpool get 1.9 million bucks?

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Why the DOJ Has Stopped Describing Maduro as the Head of a Literal Drug Cartel

Jacob Sullum | 1.7.2026 4:25 PM

I Once Supported Regime Change in Iraq. That's Why Venezuela Worries Me.

Phil Klay | 1.7.2026 4:04 PM

ICE Shoots and Kills Woman in Minneapolis

C.J. Ciaramella | 1.7.2026 2:41 PM

A Recent Book Shows Why Invading Greenland Would Be a Dumb Idea

Matthew Petti | 1.7.2026 12:40 PM

Americans Love Individualism. So Why Does Hollywood Demonize It?

John Stossel | 1.7.2026 11:45 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks