I think this is right. I remember in various art history courses certain pieces were described as causing a huge uproar not only in the art world but within the general public of its era. I’d sit there wondering just how or why, not fully appreciating the context of the time it was made.

I think this “piece” if you will follows that. It’s super controversial because of what it claims as fine art - an NFT of crude imagery in meme form valued at ungodly sums of crypto currency during these days when a large part of the population is desperate for stimulus checks. (Talk about the current human condition in the era of hypermodernity!)

It’s genius. I could also be blowing smoke up my own ass.

I don’t “get it” like I think people 50 years from now will (when the conventional wisdom is it was a radical departure that opened new ground in the stagnant art world - the first hypermodern masterpiece, or whatever the tastemakers of the time decree) but that gives me the advantage, living through it, of seeing this as something completely preposterous, absurd, and “not art!”.

The NFT art movement in general makes you think about what art means and as much as other art movements from worlds ago did to the people of that time.

The content quality of the imagery hardly matters. Sort of. It’s crude, political, cheap, unaffordable, and outrageously offensive to some.

It is us in this time and we hate to see it.