Jordyn Fox
Feb 8th 2017
Appropriation Art: Artist As Support Personnel
Artists have various support personnel that are involved in the artistic process. We consider a painter to be an artist, this painter may have many support personnel that aid in the artistic process such as the manufacturer of the canvas, or the manufacturer of the gesso that primes it, whoever mixes the pigments to make the paints (unless this is done by the painter him/self), the maker of the brushes, and potentially even assistants that help in the painting process. In nonvisual arts there are many more support personnel to consider who aren’t considered “artists” and aren’t given credit for the work as a whole. A question that comes out of this is, “How little of the core artistic activity can a person do and still be an artist?”[1]. This question becomes more complicated when looking at appropriation art.
“Appropriation is the intentional borrowing, copying, and alteration of preexisting images and objects. It is a strategy that has been used by artists for millennia, but took on new significance in mid-20th-century America and Britain with the rise of consumerism and the proliferation of popular images through mass media outlets from magazines to television.”[2]
In the process of appropriation art, the artist turns another artist into support personnel.
“Marchel Duchamp… by insisting that he created a valid work of art when he signed a commercially produced snowshovel or a reproduction of the Mona Lisa on which he had drawn a mustache, thus classifying Leonardo as support personnel along with the snowshovel’s designer and manufacturer. Outrageous as that idea may seem, something like it is standard in making collages, entirely constructed of other people’s work”[3]
There are many issues that arise within this art world of artists appropriating other artists works to create their own. One is that of copyright. The United States passed the Copyright act of 1976 that protects artists and gives them certain rights:
“Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:
- To reproduce the work in copies or phono records;
- To prepare derivative works based upon the work;
- To distribute copies of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
- To perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works;
- To display the copyrighted work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work; and
- In the case of sound recordings, to perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.
In addition to copyright, certain authors of works of visual art also have the rights of attribution and integrity as described in section 106A of the 1976 Copyright Act.
It is illegal for anyone to violate any of the rights provided by the copyright law to the copyright holder.”[4]
These laws, specifically the point that states “To prepare derivative works based upon the work;” are meant to protect the use of an artist’s work. Although the copyright rules are extensive the length of the copyright is defined:
“A work that is created (fixed in tangible form for the first time) on or after January 1, 1978, is automatically protected from the moment of its creation and is given a term of copyright protection enduring for the lifetime of the artist plus an additional 70 years after the artist’s death.”[5]
This makes imagery considered “public domain” after a certain amount of time to where artists can not hold onto these rights.
Artists can get around some of the copyright laws by using images that are considered public domain. Artists also have gotten away with some with using other artists work if they have changed enough on the original that it is discernably different from the original, or by gaining permission from the original artist.
For my field guide I will be looking at different examples of appropriation art. Through the lens of support personnel I will look at the support personnel of the original piece, and then that of the appropriated work. I will look at different levels of appropriation from changing almost nothing, to changing everything about the piece. I will also touch on some of the ethics of these works, and if any disputes from the original artist came about, or any copyright issues. Some of the artists I will specifically look into are: Marchel Duchamp using Leonardo DaVinci as support personnel, Andy Warhol using the Campbells Soup Co, Sherrie Levine using Walker Evans, and Robert Raushenberg using William DeKooning. Other examples will also be explored. This will touch on the idea of originality, and what it takes to be considered an “artist” when you are using another artists as a tool to make art.
Videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IZhzUDSBTY
Works Cited:
“Copy Basics.” Artists Rights Society. Acessed February 08, 2017. Htp//www.arsny.com/copyright-basics/.
“MoMA Learning.” MoMA | Appropriation. Accessed February 08, 2017. https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/themes/pop-art/appropriation.
Sfmoma. YouTube. April 27, 2010. Accessed February 08, 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGRNQER16Do.
[2] “MoMA Learning.” MoMA | Appropriation. Accessed February 08, 2017. https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/themes/pop-art/appropriation.
[4] “Copy Basics.” Artists Rights Society. Acessed February 08, 2017. Htp//www.arsny.com/copyright-basics/.