Obey Plagiarist Shepard Fairey
My commments on a critique by artist Mark Vallen.
The concept of plagiarism put forth by the author is a weak one. There is a fine line between strictly "ripping off" someone's work and the reinterpretation thereof.
From the original article:
"[ Left: Black Panther - Pirkle Jones. Photograph. 1968. Portrait of an anonymous Panther at a political rally in Oakland, California. The Panther photos of Ruth-Marion Baruch and Pirkle Jones are internationally famous and have long been available in book form. Right: Fairey’s street poster, which neither credits Pirkle Jones nor makes any mention of the Black Panther Party.]"
In the case of the artistic recreation of Pirckle Jones' work, there is no need or requirement to "credit" the original photographer. It is very common for artists to work directly from someone else's photographs. In some ways it is very similar to drawing a real-life subject. It is not plagiarism.
Loosely termed, "all art is plagiarism." Most of today's work is unmistakably derived from that of previous generations. Yes, Shepard Fairey's work may be an extreme case. But how extreme is it really?
I don't necessarily justify Shepard Fairey, but I disagree with Mark Vallen's line of reasoning.
The concept of plagiarism put forth by the author is a weak one. There is a fine line between strictly "ripping off" someone's work and the reinterpretation thereof.
From the original article:
"[ Left: Black Panther - Pirkle Jones. Photograph. 1968. Portrait of an anonymous Panther at a political rally in Oakland, California. The Panther photos of Ruth-Marion Baruch and Pirkle Jones are internationally famous and have long been available in book form. Right: Fairey’s street poster, which neither credits Pirkle Jones nor makes any mention of the Black Panther Party.]"
In the case of the artistic recreation of Pirckle Jones' work, there is no need or requirement to "credit" the original photographer. It is very common for artists to work directly from someone else's photographs. In some ways it is very similar to drawing a real-life subject. It is not plagiarism.
Loosely termed, "all art is plagiarism." Most of today's work is unmistakably derived from that of previous generations. Yes, Shepard Fairey's work may be an extreme case. But how extreme is it really?
I don't necessarily justify Shepard Fairey, but I disagree with Mark Vallen's line of reasoning.
Comments