One of modern art’s most persistent supporters is controversy. And Shepard Fairy has drummed up his fare share during his rise to fame as the Hope poster boy.
LA Artist Mark Vallen’s has posted an essay titled Obey Plagiarist Shepard Fairey in which he breaks down much of the Obey art and shows exactly where Shepard is boosting his images.
Fairey has developed a successful career through expropriating and recontextualizing the artworks of others, which in and of itself does not make for bad art. Pop artist Roy Lichtenstein based his paintings on the world of American comic strips and advertising imagery, but one was always aware that Lichtenstein was taking his images from comic books; that was after all the point, to examine the blasé and artificial in modern American commercial culture. When Lichtenstein painted Look Mickey, a 1961 oil on canvas portrait of Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck, everyone was cognizant of the artist’s source material – they were in on the joke. By contrast, Fairey simply filches artworks and hopes that no one notices – the joke is on you.
We don’t disagree with Vallen, but appropriation is kind of Shepard’s whole point. And to miss that is to miss out completely on the “pop genius” of his work. Shepard did it. It caught on to something in pop culture and now he’s getting collected, shown, and paid. Isn’t that the way art is supposed to work?
[Link: Mark Vallen via Boston.com]
Vallen is not against appropriation. He is against appropriation that is not covered by fair use. We have copyright laws for a reason and eventually Fairey will infringe on someone who will take legal action. In order for it to be fair use the public should be able to make a connection between the old work that was used and the new art. People don’t make that connection with Fairey’s art. They don’t know who Rene Mederos. If Fairey was using Mickey Mouse people would make the connection. If he played on one of Warhol’s images people would make the connection. But instead he uses some images from living artists and photographer who people are not aware off and targets works that are not known by the majority of people. For fair use you almost have to use an image that is iconic on its own. Fairey has a twisted view of fair use. It is Fairey use, not fair.
Here is a good critique of the SuperTouch critique of Vallen’s opinions, http://www.myartspace.com/blog/2009/02/jamie-oshea-obeys-shepard-fairey-by.html
What a bunch of idiot comments about Fairey. You people are stupider than you have a right to be.This guy Fairey has made a career out of lifting images that don’t belong to him then passing them off as his own. As an artist myself this is the lowest thing you can do. He doesn’t deserve any support as an artist. You people that believe he doesn’t do this are gravely misinformed and need to do your homework before you embrace your poster boy. Now I see the Obama picture was lifted as well! Great Artist indeed. Great hack non-artist is more like it.
Fairey’s current ‘struggles’ with the AP further show is inability to live by the copyright laws in which he is using as a shield. There is no distinction from the AP image or the poster of ‘Hope’. Rule no. 1 in graphic work, get permission to use an image, or buy it. Don’t grab and dash for the door in hopes to cash in. Yet, once again, his unimaginative works do not impress, nor does his commercialization of himself. Whether you support this man is your choice, but it should fall far from receiving artistic respect.
Comments on this entry are closed.