Thursday, November 23, 2017
 

“Overplayed Warhol Tricks No Longer Renew Perspective”


Images in question in the Graham v. Prince copyright infringement case.

Images in question in the Graham v. Prince copyright infringement case.

If you’re still thinking about the Graham v. Prince copyright/appropriation case, here’s a good article by The Federalist’s Robin Ridless. One point usually brought up by the art law intelligentsia is that appropriation is, on its face, still radical.

Art historians will testify the practice has a long and vaunted tradition. Indeed, it does. But our habits of cultural consumption change, and today we must ask: Does this overplayed Warholian strategy still have the capacity to shock and surprise?

To the art law intelligentsia, appropriation is most certainly shocking and surprising, but we can certainly forgive their dying devotion and simply chalk it up to the probability that they have just opened their very first Rizzoli art history book fresh from Amazon Prime. That, or they still read Baudrillard with libidinal gusto.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

No comments so far.
 
Legal

Clancco, Clancco: The Source for Art & Law, Clancco.com, and Art & Law are trademarks owned by Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento. The views expressed on this site are those of Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento and of the artists and writers who submit to Clancco.com. They are not the views of any other organization, legal or otherwise. All content contained on or made available through Clancco.com is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed, nor is anything submitted to Clancco.com treated as confidential.

Website Terms of Use, Privacy, and Applicable Law.
 

Switch to our mobile site