Appropriation and Art Essay

Appropriation in the visual devices is when an artist takes possession of anothers work and re-uses it in a different context, most commonly in order to reveal issues surrounding airplane pilotity or a meaning not app atomic number 18nt in the fender work1. The types of appropriation used by artists include re-visioning, re-evaluation, variation, imitation, parody, homage, mimicry and allusion2. The practice of appropriation is a tradition that has been espouse by artists throughout history, but in to a greater extent recent times has become an art effort that questions the whole creative process, intending more than to bring out a new meaning.In order to order whether copying stick outs when developing artwork is a valid technique, or an ethical approach, two display cases of historical appropriated images be considered the Third of May painted originally by Fancisco Goya in 1808, and The introduction of Adam painted by Michelangelo in 1511. Francisco Goyas original piece entitle Third of May, depicts Napoleons military personnel executing Spanish resisters.The painting is divided in two sections, on the right(a) of the painting are Napoleons troops armed and ready to shoot and on the left are the resisters, whatsoever dead while the others beg for their lives. The impending execution of civilians lies at the heart of the painting, highlighting the horror of struggle and the injustices it brings. Third of May by Francisco Goya (1808)4 This image was subsequently appropriated by Edouart Manets in his painting entitled The execution of Emperor Maximilian in 1867.As with the original, the painting is also divided into two sections. On the right side are the troops ready to fire and execute. On the opposite side are the deprive civilians awaiting their deaths, the onlookers watching in horror and dismay. The Execution of Emperor Maximilian by Edouard Manet (1867)5 This image was subsequently appropriated by Pablo Picasso in his painting Massacre in Korea. Like the original and Manets version, the painting is divided into two sections, the nonionized troops to the right, the civilians to the left.The painting by Picasso differs from the original in that a more modern form of art (abstract) is used to portray the characters and scene. It also contrasts the two groups more, the innocent victims being less well defined and more vulnerable and the soldiers more dominant5. Consequently, the image is more suggestive of the barbarism associated with war and the universal civilian low it brings, rather than the single events depicted in the two others. Massacre in Korea by Pablo Picasso (1951)6Another example of appropriation in art is the classic painting by Michelangelo entitled The Creation of Adam that adorns the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in Rome. Painted in 1510, it portrays god reaching for Adam to give him the spark of vivification, and reinforces the Christian beliefs that dominated life at the time. It is such an ico nic image that its use by other artists in their own works cannot be seen as forgery. And the image has been used by others. The Creation of Adam by Michelangelo (1510)7Amongst the artists that have used this image, a painting by Samuel Bak entitled Creation of Wartimes II (1999) is a prime example of appropriating an image to tell a different story. In has painting, Bak borrows from Michelangelo to ask the question, Where is God? , as Adam lies amongst the rubble of a ruined world. Creation of Wartimes II by Samuel Bak (1999)8 The original Michelangelo image has also been parodied in mainstream entertainment like The Simpsons, as in the case of The homer of Seville shown in 2007.The Homer of Seville (2007)9 In a similar fashion, Andreas Krapf s pop art painting entitled Almighty draws on Michelangelos work to convey a message about modern society. Almighty by Andreas Krapf (2009)10 As is evident from these examples of appropriation, there is no sense that the artist who uses previ ous works is trying to hide the circumstance that they copied the original. In fact, it appears that the artist wants the looker to recognize the image, so that they can compare their original associations to the context that is instantaneously being portrayed.To argue that copying is not a valid approach to developing artwork, instead equivalence it to plagiarism, misses the point. By clearly referring to the original, the artist is in way acknowledging the former work, and only borrowing it to reinforce or add to the message that was originally intended. This can sometimes diminish the impact or meaning of the original work, as in the case of some parodies, but appropriation in the art world is as old as art itself and cannot be dismissed as being invalid.In terms of the morals of appropriation, artists should be free to comment on society, and use whatever means they see as infallible to convey their message. The act of using other peoples work might seem a bit like cheating , but it differs from forgery, in that Picasso was not copying a Goya painting and trying to get to it off as a Goya painting. He, like other artists who have appropriated the work of others before them, wanted the viewer to make the connection with the previous image and add to it so that the original message becomes even more powerful, or has a more modern context.Referenceshttp//www.all-art.org/history480-3.html