Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NYT Touts White House Artworks, Misses Obvious Copy, Apparent Fraud (Freeper Breaks the Story)
Freeper Investigation ^ | 10-7-09 | Freeper

Posted on 10/08/2009 12:05:05 PM PDT by Atlas Sneezed

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-212 last
To: Beelzebubba

Yes, I can provide you with some examples; Picasso is actually considered one of the first appropriation artists, although candidly the ‘appropriation art’ of artists like Sherri Levine is much beyond what he ever did.

Here are a couple of quotes I think you’ll find of interest. The first is about Picasso, and the second is by Picasso himself, both are from the same source:

“Picasso was criticised for his interpretation or appropriation of other artists’ work. Today this art practice is widely accepted.”

http://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/picasso/home/ed/case_studies

‘What is an artist, basically? He’s a collector who wants to establish a collection of his own, making the pictures himself that he likes by other people. That’s how I begin, and then it turns into something else.’
-Pablo Picasso

http://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/picasso/home/ed/case_studies

Here’s another quote from Wikipedia:

“During 1957 Pablo Picasso painted 58 recreations of Las Meninas.” (Las Meninas is a painting originally by Diego Velázquez)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Meninas

Picasso is actually known for recreating numerous paintings by other “Old Masters,” including Cezanne and Manet. Unfortunately, it is difficult to find images on the web; presumably this is because their current owners are less flexible on copyright law than he was :)

Also, I apologize for overreacting in my last post; I haven’t given you enough credit and I took this too personally. I do understand where you’re coming from, and I realize we are coming from vastly opposing viewpoints.


201 posted on 10/15/2009 8:14:11 PM PDT by Pukadon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Looks like someone kidnapped the Dutch Boy and this is the ransom note.


202 posted on 11/05/2009 7:08:46 AM PST by N. Theknow (Kennedys: Can't fly, can't ski, can't drive, can't skipper a boat, but they know what's best.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
"If someone can show me that she purposefully did this to deceive and tried to hide the source and she attempted or did profit from it, then we can talk about it being a rip-off. "

To my knowledge - a study or copy of another artist's painting is not renamed & it is explained right on the copy of the painting - not explained somewhere else. One should not have to search around to identify it as a copy.

The proper signature would read: By Alma Thomas after The Snail (L'escargot), by Henri Matisse

203 posted on 11/05/2009 11:54:51 AM PST by LADY J (Change your thoughts and you change your world. - Norman Vincent Peale)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: N. Theknow

204 posted on 11/05/2009 11:57:54 AM PST by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

There are twelve ‘shapes’ inside the border of the Matisse, only eleven in the rip-off.


205 posted on 11/05/2009 11:59:45 AM PST by MHGinTN (Obots, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Oops! I am mistaken! After downloading both pictures and comparing them side-by-side, the NEA version is an obvious effort to try and use the Matisse as a pattern for a ripoff.


206 posted on 11/05/2009 12:06:25 PM PST by MHGinTN (Obots, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: N. Theknow

Looks to me like some used childrens colored construction paper to snip out shapes like Matisse’s and place them on a background then photographed and fabricated this piece of ‘art’, then perhaps used the cut outs to fill in paint for an ‘originial’.


207 posted on 11/05/2009 12:09:23 PM PST by MHGinTN (Obots, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

If I thought the Matisse was worth copying and hanging on my wall, that’s the process I’d use to make a precise copy with paint.


208 posted on 11/05/2009 12:10:28 PM PST by MHGinTN (Obots, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
"There are twelve ‘shapes’ inside the border of the Matisse, only eleven in the rip-off."

A copy of the original does not have to be an exact duplicate of the original artist's work.

It should, however not be renamed & signed by the copying artist - which would imply that it is the copy artist's original work.

If it is properly signed by the copy artist, identifying the original artist - there is nothing wrong with doing that.

209 posted on 11/05/2009 12:11:00 PM PST by LADY J (Change your thoughts and you change your world. - Norman Vincent Peale)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: LADY J

I agree. I have a cousin who does fabulous copies of great master works. She never tries to claim she owns the originals though she signs all her works as far as I know. She is very talented at even matching the colors. IIRC, she frames her paintings and places a photo of the original on the back, with short explanation. Her work is so precise, I asked her first time I saw them if she used paint by numbers canvases. She was not amused.


210 posted on 11/05/2009 12:17:26 PM PST by MHGinTN (Obots, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
"I have a cousin who does fabulous copies of great master works."

That's a great way to study & learn from the masters. Some museums let the artists bring their easels in order to paint from the originals.

I believe the purpose of the identifying signature on the copy makes sure that the painting stays identified in the case that it would be unframed, etc.

211 posted on 11/05/2009 1:06:46 PM PST by LADY J (Change your thoughts and you change your world. - Norman Vincent Peale)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
I think you have it backwards...I’d rather see a statement around 1963, in her own words, not someone else’s, where she says it was a “study”.

Exactly. The question here is when it was clear in the art community that this was a rotated Matisse. From

Fort Wayne Museum publication in 1998
it is clear it was known by 1998. Carefully looking at that publication though reveals that the author (Ann Gibson) didn't know about the relation between the paintings before she wrote the article, because she says in footnote 36 (page 52) that it was Sachi Yanari (the curator of the museum) that pointed this out to her. She even mentions the date of the letter (March 6, 1997) and the fact that she found a copy of the Matisse painting in the file of the Hirschhorn.

By explicitly crediting Yanari, she makes clear that the relation between the paintings was not widely known by the time. And this was 34 years after the painting was made. So yes, it was probably known "for decades" that Watusi was inspired by Matisse but the fact that it was actually a copy was not. That only came out in the open in 1998.

Does that make it a fraudulent copy? We have to be careful here, but it definitely does not look good.

212 posted on 11/11/2009 10:57:18 AM PST by LogicGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-212 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson