Artistic originality and appropriation
Aug. 18th, 2006 02:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
malsperanzaFor those who want to continue to explore the problem of artistic originality and appropriation, and its intersection with plagiarism and copyright infringement, I am here providing some additional useful links. I urge those of you who are blogging about this to turn to some of the expertise available on the web, and to get well-informed about this very nuanced, layered, and complex area of the intersection of law and cultural standards. Otherwise the argument is circular, and is more about the venting of random opinions than the search for best practices.
Behind the cut is a superb series of streaming videos and audios on the complicated relationship between art and copyright. Some of them deal more with visual art than writing, but they are very illuminating for the debate about plagiarism vs. appropriation.
http://arts.columbia.edu/dmc/docs/lectureseries.html
You need Quicktime to watch these.
For the discussion of plagiarism vs. legitimate appropriation, I strongly recommend Jeffrey Cunard's lecture. Cunard is a leading intellectual-property attorney, who is not a conservative hyper-pro-copyright lawyer as so many top copyright lawyers tend to be. He gives a clear set of definitions, with visual examples, of forgery, plagiarism, and kinds of appropriation that are not so obviously illegitimate. Bear in mind, too, that Cunard is not discussing the specialized and peculiar realm of fanfiction, which has its own context. (And as we all know, context is a significant element in any copyright question, recognized in law. Indeed, required by law.) Note that parody is only one small chunk of the idea of artistic appropriation.
If you don't have the patience to watch the whole lecture, you might scroll down to sections XI-XIII, "Scene Stealing" and after, to see examples discussed of reuse of copyrighted material that on the surface look like sheer plagiarism or even copyright infringement but may be legitimate appropriation. But if you have patience to watch the whole lecture, you'll learn a lot.
* * *
An amazing case study of two artists caught in the tangle of appropriation vs. copyright infringement is the painter Joy Garnett's presentation in the above set of lectures. A fuller, very detailed set of links, images, and updates is on Garnett's website: http://firstpulseprojects.net/joywar.html
A recent conference at NYU is available here: http://newsgrist.typepad.com/comediesoffairuse/ and includes an updated presentation by Joy Garnett, who is joined by Susan Meiselas. And more about the whole Joywar story, with more pictures, is here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/newsgrist/sets/72057594138438448/.
Note the interesting fact that the two artists, Garnett and the photographer Susan Meiselas, were co-presenters on the same panel and are exploring the problem of artistic appropriation together, publicly, thoughtfully, and without insulting each other. This audio is especially valuable because it offers Meiselas's pov, not just Garnett's, without vituperation, without ad hominem attacks, and with great eloquence. These two artists provide a model of intelligent discourse about difficult questions of authority, crediting, freedom of expression, art, and honesty. We could all learn from them.
Also, P.S., this is not a new problem: http://www.spaightwoodgalleries.com/Pages/Marcantonio_Durer.html Cf. also Lisa Pon, Raphael, Dürer, and Marcantonio Raimondi: Copying and the Italian Renaissance Print, Yale U Press, 2004.
Behind the cut is a superb series of streaming videos and audios on the complicated relationship between art and copyright. Some of them deal more with visual art than writing, but they are very illuminating for the debate about plagiarism vs. appropriation.
http://arts.columbia.edu/dmc/docs/lectureseries.html
You need Quicktime to watch these.
For the discussion of plagiarism vs. legitimate appropriation, I strongly recommend Jeffrey Cunard's lecture. Cunard is a leading intellectual-property attorney, who is not a conservative hyper-pro-copyright lawyer as so many top copyright lawyers tend to be. He gives a clear set of definitions, with visual examples, of forgery, plagiarism, and kinds of appropriation that are not so obviously illegitimate. Bear in mind, too, that Cunard is not discussing the specialized and peculiar realm of fanfiction, which has its own context. (And as we all know, context is a significant element in any copyright question, recognized in law. Indeed, required by law.) Note that parody is only one small chunk of the idea of artistic appropriation.
If you don't have the patience to watch the whole lecture, you might scroll down to sections XI-XIII, "Scene Stealing" and after, to see examples discussed of reuse of copyrighted material that on the surface look like sheer plagiarism or even copyright infringement but may be legitimate appropriation. But if you have patience to watch the whole lecture, you'll learn a lot.
* * *
An amazing case study of two artists caught in the tangle of appropriation vs. copyright infringement is the painter Joy Garnett's presentation in the above set of lectures. A fuller, very detailed set of links, images, and updates is on Garnett's website: http://firstpulseprojects.net/joywar.html
A recent conference at NYU is available here: http://newsgrist.typepad.com/comediesoffairuse/ and includes an updated presentation by Joy Garnett, who is joined by Susan Meiselas. And more about the whole Joywar story, with more pictures, is here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/newsgrist/sets/72057594138438448/.
Note the interesting fact that the two artists, Garnett and the photographer Susan Meiselas, were co-presenters on the same panel and are exploring the problem of artistic appropriation together, publicly, thoughtfully, and without insulting each other. This audio is especially valuable because it offers Meiselas's pov, not just Garnett's, without vituperation, without ad hominem attacks, and with great eloquence. These two artists provide a model of intelligent discourse about difficult questions of authority, crediting, freedom of expression, art, and honesty. We could all learn from them.
Also, P.S., this is not a new problem: http://www.spaightwoodgalleries.com/Pages/Marcantonio_Durer.html Cf. also Lisa Pon, Raphael, Dürer, and Marcantonio Raimondi: Copying and the Italian Renaissance Print, Yale U Press, 2004.
