onewilyfool Posted September 24, 2010 Share Posted September 24, 2010 http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/msg/1970332934.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenumber2 Posted September 24, 2010 Share Posted September 24, 2010 Don't kid yourself. It's ugly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevef Posted September 24, 2010 Share Posted September 24, 2010 Peter Max's old guitar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted September 24, 2010 Share Posted September 24, 2010 Fugly for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrosurfer1959 Posted September 24, 2010 Share Posted September 24, 2010 Too close to call but leaning towards the interesying but ugly end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted September 24, 2010 Share Posted September 24, 2010 $600?!?!?!? That's one thing every starving artist must have: chutzpah! \:D/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danner Posted September 24, 2010 Share Posted September 24, 2010 Ugly, definitely ugl, ... no wait, are those bewbies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsc Posted September 25, 2010 Share Posted September 25, 2010 It's a piece, of sh..............art!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted September 25, 2010 Share Posted September 25, 2010 We could call it a piece of art. We could call it an ugly piece of art - or we could just call it ugly. We could be ugly in calling it a piece of art and we could make a piece of art of calling it ugly. We could be arty and claim that art has to be ugly or be ugly in claiming that art has to be arty. We could declare everything ugly for art and everything arty for ugly, , , heck, don’t wanna be no judge – but I kind of like the purple dot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.