Here are a few of Chihuly's works. Sometimes there is a division between fine and decorative arts. But these seem to be fine art to me.
Posted on 05/08/2006 6:19:05 AM PDT by Republicanprofessor
A Redmond glassblower who was sued for copyright violations last year by artist Dale Chihuly fired back in court Friday — challenging the integrity of Chihuly's art and the public's impression of how it's created.
Among other things, Robert Kaindl alleges in a counterclaim filed in U.S. District Court that Chihuly is not involved in conceiving, creating, designing or even signing a "substantial number" of artworks that bear his name.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
Here are a few of Chihuly's works. Sometimes there is a division between fine and decorative arts. But these seem to be fine art to me.
Art ping #3 today.
Let Sam Cree, Woofie, or me know if you want on or off this ping list.
His work is teriffic. I saw a show of his stuff here in Santa Barbara, and then several of his major pieces in the Bahamas at the Atlantis Casino in Nassau. Beautiful fine art (IMO). Thanks for the post.
People who work with glass muses shouldn't throw stones......
May I join the Art Ping List ?
FrPR
May I join the Art Ping List ?
FrPR
I would tend to believe that a large amount of his work is not of his own making. He turns out that stuff like a mass production assembly line.
I know he's got a huge studio and a lot of people working for him. I would doubt he puts his hands on very much anymore.
Well, if I were Chihuly, I wouldn't have claimed the green thing.
...And then there was the story of the African lesser King who had his guys steal the throne of a rich king. He hid it in the rafters of his hut..
In the middle of the night, it fell killing him as he slept.
"Those who live in grass houses shouldn't stow thrones". :^)
His works were displayed at the art museum here a years ago, and the show proved such a draw that the exhibit was extended. Chihuly eventually donated pieces to our art museum and (horticultural) conservatory.
On my trip to Vegas in '01, I was able to look up at the ceiling in the Bellagio's lobby and instantly recognize the work of Dale Chihuly :)
Hmmm... I've also admired Chihuly's work, and while it is relatively distinctive and easy to spot... it would also be relatively easy for another artist to make glass that looks Chihuly-esque. I can't see how there can be a copyright, unless there is a question of branding and someone using Chihuly's name without permission.
I wonder what the details of the suit are.
I think his pieces are beautiful.
LOL. It is a bit like a sea creature gone all wrong.
LOL!.....good one!.........
Yes, some don't like that neon green color.
But look at the purple stripes, and the huge size of the work!
I can't even touch glass that big; it would shatter through shear bad luck.
Trademarking thought is tough. How many have looked at a wooden carved duck and then made copies. The value is in the quality of the work not in the design.
His "seaforms" are some of my favorites. I'd happily take the "green thing". :) http://www.chihuly.com/seaforms/selsea.html
There was an installation at the Atlanta Botanical Gardens - it was beautiful!!!! My wife and I visited it twice.
They currently have his work on exhiit at the Missouri Botanical Gardens - I haven't made it up there yet, but hope to this week.
Some of his work I like, some I find garish.
I'm near Tacoma and have seen a lot of his stuff, and the bridge of glass... I think most of it looks like a really bad dream.
Gorgeous stuff. I would not be surprised if much of 'his' work is actually produced by interns in his studio. By the nature of the medium, unless he physically controls the entire glass blowing process, those works are not by him.
However, it's his studio, and his vision.
this is not a Mark Kostabi
Chihuly is a hack. Can't stand his stuff.
If Chihuly can copyright glassblowing, could van Gogh have copyrighted painting?
"Gorgeous stuff. I would not be surprised if much of 'his' work is actually produced by interns in his studio. By the nature of the medium, unless he physically controls the entire glass blowing process, those works are not by him."
Read the article:
"Chihuly's studio has long acknowledged that the artist does not blow glass himself, relying instead on a team of glassblowers and hired contractors to execute his ideas. But the concepts, designs and final aesthetic are distinctly his, Chihuly and his associates have repeatedly said."
Chihuly is like many successful artists who mass produce their work, they rely on a studio to manage the output, while he oversees the design. It's nothing new, and it the's defining line between original art and a brand.
Studios have been used by leading artists to maintain and finish large ticket commisions for thousands of years - Michelangelo trained in one such studio on his way towards greatness. It's a good way of training young artists, employing lesser artists who might not sell work on their own, and letting a master free himself from drudge work to concentrate on his art. Granted, it dilutes the art, as a lot of Renaissance work had the central figures done by the Master, and the backgroung by his studio, but the work is still regarded as the masterpieces they are. Michelangelo, if fact, was an odd duck in his day for the periods he insisted on working alone.
Interesting case, but it's not over wether or not Chihuly made the works in question, it's two people accusing Chihuly of damaging their reputation in the market, while, Chihuly maintains they were selling works purported or implied they were by him.
If they copied pieces Chihuly displayed and sold previously, they lose. But, and this is the important part, if Chihuly can get a copyright on a look or technique, that's a chilling blow to artists, and can lead to one artist "copywriting" a style, like Impressionism, and barring other artists from working in that school or style.
And, for what it's worth, Chihuly's work is stunning.
Are you talking Columbus, Indiana? The local art contingent promotes him likes he's some god. But that's what artists do. His stuff is interesting as long as he's paying for it and not my tax dollars.
Actually I'm in Columbus, O. But I've been to Columbus, Indiana before and it's a fascinating place! Seems very avant-garde for a city that size and no big university in the area.
Yes, it's an interesting city. There is that group here that likes to think of themselves as avant-garde. I guess I'm not that into modernistic architecture and art.
all good points
Architects work the same way. Take Frank Gehry for instance.
Very little of the design is done by him. He critiques what his design studios mass produce in the form of drawings and models, he approves a design, and its developed into construction documents (Gehry does not do this, nor do any architects).
He could trademark his designs and receive copywright protection. In Gehry's case, his work is a brand as well. there have been legal cases of architects/developers suing other architects/developers over copying a design.
In the Chihuly case, the idea of taking another artists work outside of your studio, and slapping your name on it is troubliing. I would find it difficult to copywright a design like his, unless it was for a specific brand or term.
Beautiful. I've watched glass blowers at work - it is truly an artform.
We found a church and went to Sunday service there, sat kinda towards the back. Right in front of us were a family with three younger children--maybe ages 2, 4 and 5. They were so antsy the entire time, climbing over their parents, talking/babbling, smiling at us, etc. and my bro & I just couldn't stop laughing. It was hilarious! The kids (self included) all seemed to play off each other, and by the time we left all four parents were pretty irritated...lol!
Funny how times don't really change that much, even though we do ;)
He hasn't for years...he is missing an eye. He directs the glass making process.
Great post!
"The longer someone continues to produce via a particular technique, the greater the risk that the technique will be figured out and appropriated by someone else."
This reminds me of the product knockoffs that you see all the time in Walmart. Someone comes up with an innovation and a product that is really different and before you know it there are cheap clones all over the place. It's somewhat discouraging for the innovator but at least in the art world collectors do know the difference between originals and cheap copies.
I think you're right, as a creative person you have to stay ahead of the curve and keep moving forward. Best of luck with your work!
I watched it. I found the process interesting, but did not find the resulting works to be interesting at all.
Louis Comfort Tiffany of the copper-foil stained glass fame didn't do his own work. He did many of the designs and made many of the important decisions but he had scores of glass blowers and others working in his studio.
Even though he wasn't personally blowing the glass his work is instantly recognizable as his. He never showed his work the Atlantis Casino, the Bellagio or other venues of high art though.
Hell, I'm so jinxed, the damn thing would break if I looked at it too closely...
I know.
He directs the glass making process.
I'm not sure that buying a painting "directed" by Van Gogh is the same as buying a painting painted by Van Gogh.
My obsession with glass as an artistic medium renders me completely unobjective when it comes to Chihuly. I adore his work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.