After reading Walter Benjamin's article, I started to think about what constitutes "original" artwork. Copies have often been critcized as unoriginal, but I feel that copied artwork is original as long as the artist is trying to add a new dimension to the piece. For example, in class we analyzed Paul Rubens' copy of Titian's painting. Even though Rubens' painting had the same subject matter (Adam and Eve), his representation of the subject matter was drastically different. Rubens' intention was not to produce an identical replica of Titian's painting. In my opinion, this makes Rubens' painting an original piece of art.
In contrast, I found this article about a village in China called Dafen (http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,433134,00.html). In Dafen, millions of popular paintings are copied by Chinese artists as a way to earn money. A skilled "artist" can paint about 30 copies a day, many of which end up in the suburban homes of Americans. To me, this operation in Dafen is undermining the authenticity of famous artwork. The sole purpose of these Chinese imitations is to produce revenue. Chinese workers in Dafen are not reproducing famous art pieces with the intention of making these pieces original.
I think that a reproduced piece of art is original as long as the artist uses the piece solely as a foundation for their own work. As long as the artist produces an end product that conveys a different emotion, idea, etc. from the original piece, then that piece is also original.
No comments:
Post a Comment