You are currently browsing the daily archive for December 2nd, 2007.
We were talking about Hitler in my European avant-garde class and the artist John Heartfield came to mind. I had learned about Heartfield last year and I remembered how he would use appropriated images to make his art, which commented on the politics of his time. His most famous work was produced in Germany during the1920s and 30s. He used photomontage to create his posters, which usually made a strong statement. Much of his work reflects his early interest in Dada and communism. His work was generally mass-produced in poster form or in newspapers and magazines. It stands as evidence of the rise in the influence of the mass media at this time and of the powerful relationship it had with politics. Much of Heartfield’s work shows a clever and sharp response to significant events of the era.
Heartfield would take images from the media, re-contextualizing them creating his own image. He focused his work on the politics of Adolph Hitler. With these images Heartfeild would create very powerful yet humorous photomontages pointing out the many problems with Hitler. He felt his artwork was the best way he could voice himself and criticize what was going on in Germany at the time. In the picture below we can see Heartfield’s 1936 piece Have no fear – He’s a vegetarian. The bird symbolizes France and the man in the left hand corner is Label, the premiere of France. The image is suggesting that Hitler cannot be trusted. Heartfield continued to make many images just like this one. His use of photography had such an impact that Hitler eventually put out an arrest for him causing him to flee from Germany.
I like Heartfield’s work because it was cutting edge at the time. Not a lot of people were experimenting with photomontage or collage during this time period. Heartfeild managed to use this medium in an artistic sense as well as make strong political statements that really caught the eye of the viewer. I think his work can be compared to advertisments in that it uses witty remarks and strong visuals to attract an audience. Today this type of artwork is very common. The idea of manipulating images has only been further developed. With programs like Photoshop anyone can experiment with photography. Heartfield was one of the first artists to use images from the media and recontextualize them. He definitely started a craze that will only continue to grow especially with the technology available today.
John Heartfield, Have No Fear — He’s a Vegetarian, 1936
Another example of Heartfields work:
John Heartfield, Adolph the Superman, July 1932
-Allison
I really enjoyed lecture on Tuesday. Jean Bridge explored many different artists who have been changing the way we look at art by doing innovative things that no one has ever done before. One artist I wanted to discuss further is Yoko Ono. The artwork that Yoko made in the early 1960’s required the viewer to become apart of the process. She made a series of works called “Instruction Paintings”. These pieces consisted of a set of instructions, which were displayed on a wall just as paintings in a gallery would be. The piece we discussed in class was called ‘Cut Piece’. Audience members were invited up on stage to cut pieces of clothing off Yoko’s body. Audience members were left in control of the performance as Yoko left the process in the hands of complete strangers. I think this type of work not only questions the idea of authorship but the idea of the artist and the audience. These pieces require more then one person for the piece to be experienced. The artist becomes the artwork. Yoko put her body on display and allowed people to manipulate her instead of material objects. In doing this Yoko was trying to get people to think about art in new ways. Maybe she was trying to bring out the creativity in her audience by allowing them take on the role of the artist. Whatever her goal was she questioned the idea of authorship, which I believe, challenges the idea of art. Art and Artist have always been hand in hand, equal in importance. Yoko removes this element from her conceptual pieces, which makes them harder for people to understand them as art.
Yoko Ono, Painting to Hammer a Nail, 1966 (photo by: David Behl)
Another piece similar to Yoko’s ‘Cut piece’ would be ‘Painting to Hammer a Nail’. This piece allowed spectators to hammer a nail into a canvas anywhere or any way they chose to. This allowed the spectator to become the artist and to become apart of the work. Not only was the finished board of nails a collaborative piece of art but the very act of hammering a nail into the board became the art. ‘Ceiling Painting’ is another example of this type of work. The viewer is invited to climb a ladder. At the top of the ladder there is a magnifying glass attached by a chain hanging from the ceiling. The viewer is supposed to use the magnifying glass to read the painting hung on the ceiling only to find the word “Y E S.” In this piece the viewer is not actually contributing to the making of the piece but is taking part in it rather than merely viewing it from a distance. I like Yoko Ono’s work because she always tries to incorporate her viewers into her pieces. This type of interactive art does question authorship in a sense but I think in Yoko’s case her work is more about the process rather then the finished product. She develops an idea and then lets others take control.
“What I’m trying to do is make something happen by throwing a pebble into the water and creating ripples…I don’t want to control the ripples.”
-Yoko Ono
Yoko Ono, Ceiling Painting (YES Painting), 1966
Text on paper, glass, metal frame, metal chain, and painting ladder
Photo by: Oded Lobl
-Allison
Appropriation in my own words is the use of ideas from another source. Taking element of another artists work and creating new work. Taking something that someone else has done and using it your own way. With the use of appropriation you cannot erase the original meaning. When artisits take a work of art and use it in their own work, it always holds a part of the original work. Appropriation comes in forms of artwork, speech, tattoo’s, advertising, music, photography and many more things.
Appropriation, in my opinion isn’t always confrontational or oppositional. Although with the avant-garde movement used appropriation to protest art. But I think now, although it is still used in protest. It is often used to honour other artists work. I use appropriation in my own work. I get some of my own ideas from other artists. In my own work, the original work is always present. But is never used against the artists, in protest.
The difference between appropriation and plagerism is that plagerism is the use of someone elses work, word for word. Plagerism hides the fact that it is taken from someone elses work. Appropriation honours the original work and the original artist is known and honoured through their work. Plagerism is the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work
When making art we draw on past experiences and subconsciously take elements of other works of art. Just as musicians make music based on other songs they have heard before. An example of this can be seen with Avril Lavigne’s recent hit “Girlfriend” which has a strong resemblance to The Rubinoos’ 1979 single “I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend”. The Rubinoos’ single repeats the chorus in “Hey hey, you you, I wanna be your boyfriend” similar to Avril’s “Hey hey, you you, I want to be your girlfriend” in “Girlfriend”. Could this be an act of plagiarism? Could this be some sort of appropriation? Perhaps this could be an act of the subconscious. There have been numerous cases like this one over the years. I will admit I am even guilty of this just as I am sure most people are. Someone tells you an idea and as time passes you remember this idea and truly believe belongs to you. Everyday we are stimulated by visual culture, music, news, television, books, lectures at school, and shifts at work. We are exposed to so much information that it sometimes affects the things we create. The art world tends to ignore conscious and unconscious plagiarism. Do you believe this is a possibility to the many cases of “similarity” in songs and works of art that have been discovered? Do you believe people should be punished for this? There seems to be a fine line between appropriation and plagiarism these days. A line that has possibly become a little too fine. And if this line is crossed you could end up with a pretty hefty lawsuit on your hands just like Avril did.
Check out these links and see what you think:
-Allison
