Do you think sculptures are overrated? If so, please do explain why
When I compare sculpture to painting I find painting relatively easy, and stuff that requires almost no talent being held in high regard. Very few crappy sculptures get raved about. Sculpture is both harder and more representational than other forms of art. This makes it a bit stuck in time, but I find nothing to weaken my respect for the sculptor.
I think they are, because sculptures are paid by the pound, while really ingenious painters are underpaid, or have been in their lifetime. Take Salvador Dali or Pablo Picasso, their paintings weren't worth anything during their lifetimes, only when they were dead the vultures came down from their trees and made big money. A sculpturer at least gets the metal's worth back in his lifetime, and it's easier to sell a big bronze statue to a municipality for everyone to see than a painting to a gallery. There's a song about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wefT_t2lHU
I don't think about it that much, but some sculptures are really cool. I saw one with a metal face and it's expression would change after a few minutes. I think regular stone sculptures are a little boring, but seeing some really old ones in museums shows how good the artists were without technology and modern tools.
This is a dumb question.