Appropriation in art: Redux

In my quest to find answers to appropriation in the arts, here is a quiz: Is the image below by the Austin based artist Baxter Orr a twisted parody, an example of creative appropriation or just blatant plagiarism of the original artwork by Shepard Fairey (on the right)? Full article here. You decide.

Baxter was ordered by the court to stop making this class of art (a class that involves deriving from existing artwork made by the famous graffiti artist Fairey). Appropriation is a funny thing – the legalese in the court order that orders Baxter to cease and desist states that ‘as you have neither asked for nor received permission to use the work as a basis for the artwork, I believe you have willfully infringed our rights – blah, blah…”.

I cringe when I hear that people cannot ‘use other works as a basis’ (at least as idea founts with an aim to creating works of their own). Of course, ‘as a basis’ should not mean an outright copy with minor cosmetic modifications, but should accomodate for developing ‘appropriate derivatives’ that merits enough meaning to stand on its own – now defining that will take time and effort and will need to be assigned to that austere circle of artists and lawyers working out common ground together (something like the GNU GPL), but using blanket threats of ‘cannot even use the work as a basis’, will not do good for either of the parties involved…

Left: Baxter's 'Dope'; Right: Shepard's 'Hope' (Image ripped from here)Disclaimer: I read about this first on Fecalface

Schadenfreude

Above: Banksy mural in London - (ripped from this source)

Schadenfreude could somewhat describe the state we are in with respect to the recent thrashings of the media over the identity of the splasher (who goes around systematically defacing the streets of New York City with unsightly splashes of paint over famous works by graffiti artists ostensibly because some of the more famous of these are starting to see some commercial success and gallery representations). Of course it can best be dismissed by saying that this substitute’s one form of vandalism for another, but a look at blogs like this tell us that some of these works are indeed well thought out - and I actually like some of them and study them on my way to work. Anyways, the whole movement got a further boost after the New York Times published a manifesto produced by the splasher on their website last week and some parts of it does make for interesting reading. Most of it are rants (like most manifesto’s it sizzles out after the initial premise)…
The funny thing might be that all of this might be a very elegant ruse by a new street artist to gain fame and subsequent gallery representation or, on the other hand, this could be the handiwork of a person who could genuinely be at odds with the current ‘red-hot-hedge-fund-based-art-market’ system and all the ills that the messages conveyed by the same.
With statements like “The boredom excreted by museums increasingly resembles the stench of the church” emblazoned as a catch phrase for the splashers actions, it does seem like the person has thought some of the process and actions through. City life is interesting and this is one more twist to the excitement.