Comments on: Appropriation Art and Walker Evans

By: Jonathon Delacour

Jonathon Delacour — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 18:04:37 +0000

Thank you. Though I really must write more frequently.

By: language hat

language hat — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:23:21 +0000

I’m late to the party, but welcome back — I’m delighted to see you writing again!

By: Kerim Friedman

Kerim Friedman — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:37:46 +0000

Great essay! You might enjoy reading Derrida’s lecture “Limited Inc a b c . . .” which has been published as a short book. He pokes fun at Searle’s emphasis on “intentionality” by quoting the copyright statement from the cover of Searle’s book.

By: aurelio

aurelio — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 06:22:25 +0000

This strange Borges story will confuse the already confused or it’ll show the transformational effect a “copy” can have, depending on your “reading.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Menard,_Author_of_the_Quixote

http://www.coldbacon.com/writing/borges-quixote.html

(cut & paste the above links to read & find out about the famous Borges’ story)

…just read an interview with Levine from ‘93. & you can have her words on the subject.

http://www.jca-online.com/slevine.html (cut & paste &c…..)

…& I found this interesting website on her Evans work.

http://aftersherrielevine.com/index.html (cut & paste…)

I make appropriation art & the notion of the “copy” is fascinating & it has a history that’s as old as art itself. We tend to get puritanical with the argument for “pure” originality. The “art” may be seen when the “copy” creates another idea about the work itself, a new beauty, a doppelganger or even a clone. I think the key is to acknowledge that it’s a copy, a reworking, a collaboration.

…very thoughtful post, Jonathan.

thank you, aurelio

p.s. Jonathan…send me an e-mail & I’d be happy to send you an example of my latest “appropriations.”

By: Jonathon Delacour

Jonathon Delacour — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 04:13:48 +0000

Rogers, I don't see it as a moral issue either. My objection is that it's illogical to use a image that is not copyrighted to mount an ideological argument against copyright. You're right, though, about her own copyright being part of the postmodern gag (if we accept that heavy-handed irony is a gag).

By: Rogers Cadenhead

Rogers Cadenhead — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:24:35 +0000

I don't think there's a moral issue with what Sherrie Levine did. The point of the public domain is that it be freely reused without restriction. If she was claiming the work to be her original creation, that would be dishonest, but she's clearly and provocatively indicating that it's a copy and identifying the source.

The fact that she's copyrighted her own work is part of the postmodern gag. If she didn't, it would be less interesting. Her act robs no one else of the ability to derive their own art from Walker Evans' photographs.