The Art Law Blog and Merlion at the Sculpture Community have picked up on the New York Times article about Richard Prince’s latest show. I’m intellectually intrigued by the definitions of authorship and creativity that Prince’s work challenges… but am extremely concerned by his email to the Times which indicated he “never associated advertisements with having an author“. Creative reuse of artwork (aka appropriated art) is a longstanding tradition, and it seems a statement like that from a high-profile artist has potential of harming the legitimacy of the practise.
Tags:
appropriation,
art,
richard prince,
slippery slopes
Related posts