Image - David Barsalou
I had a lengthy debate with the platonic boyfriend over this on Saturday night over whether this is OK or not. He says yes, it's just like a song being sampled and remixed into a new one, bringing a new audeince. I say no, because I'm pretty sure the original artists were never credited and the imagery passed off as his own.
Anyway. I have been wanting similar for my wall for ages... se where I am going? I own a couple of vintage love comics and thought I'd have a little try myself. Here's my practice effort, I don't like the writing, I was getting tired and spoilt it.
Oh and... remember, this is a rip off... but I will accept commissions (well? Roy did?)
xoxo
5 comments:
sounds like an interesting debate...me and my boyfriend are going to be moving into a new house soon and one of the rooms is going to be become a geektorium...a lovely home for all our comics and graphic novels. we hope to have a big ol bat man murial on one of the walls! your picture looks fab well done!!
Lichtenstein was trying to show how images that were often overlooked (such as comics, adverts etc) were also art,and to question what/why is art, similar to andy warhol's Campbell soup work. He even went to lengths to use the same techniques as the original sources. So its not like he was trying to claim the images as his own, just use them to address perceptions and such...sorry, dont mean to come across as lecturing, thats just how i took it.
Anyways, your picure looks cool, maybe you could work in the benday dots to give it a pulp comic feel?
xx
In this news article http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2006/10/18/lichtenstein_creator_or_copycat/
"...attorney Mark Weissburg wrote an article titled ``Roy Lichtenstein, Copyright Thief?" ``I was struck by the fact that Lichtenstein was never sued for copyright infringement," Weissburg wrote. ``Under copyright law if you copy a protected work without permission you are breaking the law . . . . The Copyright Act also prohibits what are called `derivative works.' These are works that play off of or incorporate or embellish another work. Virtually every one of Lichtenstein's paintings was either an out and out copy or at least a derivative work."
He did question what is art by using what people thought was comic book influenced but it's only lately we can see quite how much he was 'influenced'. No credit has been given to the original artist, and I can't think that any artist would be happy that after thye haad drawn a picture, that someone else copied it, gave them no credit, then sold it for ££££££.
Man! I studied Lichtenstein for my Art A-level but I didn't have a clue that he'd nicked it all! I'm totally with you Rowan - those original artists should have got credit.
But on another note, I love your painting! And the new colours on your blog. Also, just had a look at your website - I didn't realise it was finished! I love it! Hip hip hooray!
your painting is really good ! I can't believe how similar the images are and no credit to the original artist? I can't believe they didn't sue !
Post a Comment