In her work, Laura Belém recontextualizes objects from daily life, completely changing their meaning, renovating their situation and, moreover, the viewer’s perception of them. Thus, in a work like Enamorados [In Love], presented at the 51st Bienal de Veneza, two small boats seem to chatting with each other. The resource used is a simple one: Belém installed the boats front to front, and placed a spotlight on each of their bows. These lights turn on and off, sometimes coinciding, sometimes disagreeing with each other, thereby establishing the sensation of dialogue and, consequently, resulting in the personification of the boats.

  

***

  

City of São Paulo records the hottest month of July in almost 40 years in the NEW winter of the southern hemisphere.

 

Average maximum temperatures recorded from July 1st until yesterday were 25.9ºC / 78.8ºF. 😮😭

I used to visit the Palm House in Liverpool as a child, The delightful scent of the inside always contrasted with the severe marble and bronze statues of Henry Yates Thompson outside.

 

Returning today I noted that several of the figures are now rather more colorful.

 

I learn they have been subjects of artistic interventions aimed at recontextualizing their historical narratives. In 2021, fashion designer Taya Hughes adorned the statues of Christopher Columbus shown here and those of Captain Cook, and Henry the Navigator with elaborate Elizabethan-style ruffs made from fabrics associated with indigenous populations in Africa, New Zealand, and Australia. This "Statues Redressed" project sought to prompt discussions about the legacies of these historical figures, many of whom were involved in colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade.

 

The project aimed to engage the public in conversations about how we should respond to statues that were built to honor individuals now viewed in a different light. Whatever, they are certainly less scary than I recall.

  

L’absolu est un spectacle traversant les nombreuses tentatives de libération de l’individu englué dans la morale qui bride le corps et entrave le désir de l’homme.

  

L'absolu est une enquête poétique au cœur de la psyché des êtres, qui replace le désir au centre de nos vies. Cette quête induit un procès, un mythe réinventé où l’homme se trouve en conflit avec lui-même, ses dieux et ses démons, sa zone sombre et sa part flamboyante. Absolu car insaisissable à celui qui veut le maîtriser. Mais si ce désir n'est pas identifié, transcendé, il crée du symptôme, il "hystérise" collectivement parfois... Suscitant la catharsis des corps et invoquant les codes de la tragédie grecque dans nos sociétés contemporaines.

  

Depuis 2008, ce projet chemine dans la réflexion quant à la recontextualisation de la perception du spectateur. Boris Gibé a souhaité travailler sur une structure vertigineuse, offrant une expérience physique aux spectateurs : “Comme dans un théâtre anatomique, j’avais envie que ce spectacle soit vu du dessus, en circulaire, pour que le public se retrouve dans une réalité supérieure au sort de l'homme mis en scène”. Le Silo est un chapiteau de tôle de 9m de diamètre, 12 m de haut et d’une jauge de 100 places assises. A l'intérieur, autour de la piste, deux escaliers à double révolution s'enroulent sur 4 étages, et accueillent les spectateurs sur chacune des marches.

Dans ce puit aux images qui questionne le vide, le néant, l'inconnu, l'infini, les pistes de recherches s'orientent pour le moment vers une relation du corps avec les éléments (eau, air, feu...). L’acrobatie aérienne sur des agrès de cirque réinventés, ainsi que la contorsion y seront chorégraphiées dans une approche du geste comportemental poussant la physicalité à l’extrême.

 

The absolute is a show that goes through the many attempts to free the individual stuck in the morality that restricts the body and hinders the desire of man.

 

The absolute is a poetic investigation into the heart of the psyche of beings, which places desire at the center of our lives. This quest induces a trial, a reinvented myth where man finds himself in conflict with himself, his gods and his demons, his dark zone and his flamboyant part. Absolute because elusive to the one who wants to master it. But if this desire is not identified, transcended, it creates symptoms, it sometimes "hysterizes" collectively... Arousing the catharsis of bodies and invoking the codes of Greek tragedy in our contemporary societies.

 

Since 2008, this project has been moving forward in reflection on the recontextualization of the spectator's perception. Boris Gibé wanted to work on a vertiginous structure, offering a physical experience to the spectators: "As in an anatomical theater, I wanted this show to be seen from above, in a circle, so that the audience finds themselves in a reality superior to the fate of the man staged". The Silo is a sheet metal tent 9m in diameter, 12m high and with a capacity of 100 seats. Inside, around the track, two double-revolution staircases wind over 4 floors, and welcome the spectators on each of the steps. In this well of images that questions the void, nothingness, the unknown, the infinite, the research avenues are currently oriented towards a relationship between the body and the elements (water, air, fire...). Aerial acrobatics on reinvented circus apparatus, as well as contortion will be choreographed in an approach to behavioral gesture pushing physicality to the extreme.

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3h8VE3JdIE

 

Un grand merci pour vos favoris, commentaires et encouragements toujours très appréciés.

 

Many thanks for your much appreciated favorites and comments.

Speculating on the Blue

 

Flaka Haliti

2015

Sand, Metal, Light

56th Venice Biennale, Kosovo Pavilion

 

«Speculating on the Blue is a site specific installation conceived by Flaka Haliti for the Kosovo Pavilion at the Biennale Arte. With this work she addresses the topos of borders that are not only part of her personal history but also our everyday global reality. The artist specifically examines the features of the borderland, often deserted and seemingly decaying within a short period of time. Barriers are manmade manifestations of political decisions made about territories, which are often drawn with little regard for natural and ethnical boundaries. Haliti aims at de-militarizing and de-familiarizing the aesthetic regime that is embodied by physical borders through the creation of a counter image. In doing so she transforms the former into a sign of optimism. Her approach is one of recontextualizing global politics through disconnection from its regime of appearance. The metaphor of the horizon, simultaneously emblem of possibility and enigma of our limitations is woven into the fabric of our past and present.

 

By drawing on the universal meaning of this metaphor, the artist removes the image economy of the horizon from any specific spatial-temporal context and speculates on its validity as an eternal truth.»

 

www.kosovopavilion.com/

Surprising depth

Beneath the surface

Pile of paintings

Translucent quality

Subtle hints

Organic curves

 

VivitarSeries1 28mmF1.9 Reversed

 

In this photograph of a side chapel along the nave of Barcelona Cathedral (Catedral de la Santa Creu i Santa Eulàlia), the color has been leached from all but the radiant gold of the retablo, which gleams through the black wrought iron gates beneath the vault of ancient stones. These chapels, often overlooked by casual visitors, are remnants of centuries of devotion, wealth, and ecclesiastical politics. Originally endowed by noble families, guilds, or confradías (lay brotherhoods), each chapel was a private or semi-private devotional space, centered on a saint or religious mystery chosen by the founder.

 

Some chapels, especially those tied to active confraternities, are still used for specific feast days, Masses, or private devotions. However, to the ordinary visitor they often seem perpetually closed, their use hidden behind iron gates. Flowers appear fresh, candles are lit, and the marble is dusted, thanks to cathedral staff who maintain them—but the origins of these chapels may still be found, especially if a confraternity remains active. Evidence of this may come from small plaques, iconography related to guild symbols, or listings in cathedral brochures. On occasion, a chapel may be opened during Holy Week, on the feast day of the patron saint, or for a special Mass organized by a still-functioning confraternity.

 

In the decades after their founding—particularly for chapels dating to the 17th century—these spaces were animated by the rhythms of Catholic baroque devotion: daily prayers, commemorative Masses, and processions. Many had endowments, legally binding funds to support liturgical services and physical upkeep. But as family lines died out or funds were mismanaged, some chapels fell into disuse until the cathedral chapter assumed control.

 

In ecclesiastical circles, chapels that have remained active or preserved under their original terms of use are sometimes accorded special recognition—a token of unbroken continuity. Others have been repurposed or recontextualized for general cathedral use. Donations left in boxes or slots typically go to the cathedral itself, unless a confraternity is explicitly credited. What remains for all to see is a fusion of sacred space and civic history, often locked behind iron gates, waiting for their stories to be unlocked by the observant traveler.

 

This text is a collaboration with Chat GPT.

 

DSCF8669_2

Kern-Paillard Yvar 75mm F/2.5 C Mount

Fujifilm X-Pro 2

 

Commissioned by the City of Montréal Situated at the core of the recently developed Interna-tional Civil Aviation Organization Plaza (ICAO), Dendrites is the newest monumental public work by the artist Michel de Broin. The word dendrite refers to the branched projections of a neuron, which propagate cerebral stimulation; the term is derived from the Greek Dendron, also the word for tree. Extending, across both sides of Notre-Dame Street in the downtown core, the work is comprised of two sculptural stairways directly modelled on the neuron structure.

 

Construct-ed of weathering steel, the piece takes on the ochre colour of the tree trunks it references, while simultaneously alluding to the industrial past of the central urban site and its iron infrastructure. Through the natural process of oxidation, the sculpture’s steel surface undergoes a microscopic crystallization of iron particles recalling the formation of dendrites. This dynamic process creates a nuanced parallel between the form of the stairway and its underlying material and can also be read as analogous to the ever-changing form of the networked city surrounding it.

 

Recontextualized, in this new sculptural configuration, the underlying stairways still function as circulatory structures allowing for the movement of people while also beckoning towards an in-nate human desire for vertical ascension; the urge to reach the highest branch of a tree or peak a mountain to contemplate a new horizon. Dendrites offers such an experience, allowing the public the opportunity to climb its branches and glimpse an alternative view. Dendrites direct-ly responds to this integrated urban vision – offering passers-by the opportunity for active participation. By climbing in the branches, they animate the sculpture much like the foliage of a tree.

 

ELLEN HARVEY

b. 1967, Kent, UK

The Nudist Museum, 2010

Oil on gesso-board panels, vintage frames, paper printouts, and stanchions with velvet rope 144 × 204 in.

Collection of The Bass

2023.2.1

Ellen Harvey's The Nudist Museum explores historical and contemporary representations of the nude, questioning the underlying ideas that shape our perceptions of the body. In this work, Harvey paints imperfect reproductions of paintings, sculptures, and drawings from The Bass' permanent collection-spanning the Middle Ages to the present-using only archival documentation as her reference. This method creates layers of distance from the originals, illustrating how our perceptions are shaped by visual contexts and historical frameworks, both seen and unseen. The artist recontextualizes works from The Bass' collection within her broader critique of museum practices.

Harvey assigns arbitrary flesh tones to the pictured bodies while rendering all other elements in monochromatic grays, a technique that isolates the figures and emphasizes how identity may be artificially highlighted or constructed.

Some paintings present cropped views of figures, scrutinizing society's often narrow perspectives on nudity.

Reinforcing this critique, the paintings are installed above images collected from fashion, fitness, and pornographic magazines to starkly contrast historical and contemporary representations of the nude. The installation replicates traditional display methods, using stanchions and ornate frames to theatrically reveal how museums construct and impose narratives on art. Harvey's approach challenges the way we engage with all art-including the nude-to prompt a deeper reflection on how context and framing influences our viewing.

Excerpt from supercrawl.ca/2023/08/public-art-2023-2024/:

 

Reckoning, 2023, digital collage

 

Artist Statement: I create intuitively, and believe there is a visual alchemy that happens in the process of cut and paste. I am energized by the tactility of old books, magazines, scrap paper or other found materials, and I appreciate collage for its accessibility. Working digitally unlocks a whole other way of approaching collage that further motivates me to stretch my imagination as I muse on possible futures. The focus of my work is the elevation of Black people and asserting our existence in fantasy and the future. I remove all spatial and temporal references. Challenges of limited representation are often encountered while sourcing material – not to mention the potential of engaging with historically harmful sources. These challenges are often met through experimentation with photography and digital collage as a solution. In either practice, the subject ultimately is recontextualized and appointed the power of the gaze. The subject is Divine.

The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and the Golden Dawn.The Breaking of the Golden Dawn

They had to fight from the start against Arthur Edward Waite, who, at the head of a group of followers, wanted to modify the system of leadership, for reasons he explained in 1903: to be caliph instead of the caliph, then make The Order give up all magic, overhaul all rituals, and all for good reason: Waite claims the Third Order doesn't exist. Waite and Blackden then founded their own Order, with a temple they named Isis-Urania after the first temple of the Golden Dawn. Brodie-Inner makes his Edinburgh temple independent.Following the Golden Dawn on the Tarot track is much easier indeed: Waite in 1910 gives his drawn version of the mysteries described in "book T" of the Golden Dawn, the "Rider tarot", and accompanies it with a book where he says too much or not enough. The particularity of this game is that, unlike Book T, the Minors are small scenes illustrating the principle attached to them. But no keywords, no visible alchemy or Qabala everywhere: Waite's mysticism emanates from all magic. From the book and the game, then from Book T when it began to be distributed under the coat, many creations flourished, up to recent authors such as the game of Hanson-Roberts, Salvador Dali or the Sacred rose…while that of Crowley inspired Barbara Walker, specialist in feminine magic, the German Haindl, Gill, Clark, or the Italian Mario…in his “Tarot of the Ages”… Attempts from Book T itself gave birth to the game of Robert Wang, supervised by Israel Regardie, the game of Gareth Knight, the game of Geoffroy Dowson, the very faithful game of Sandra Tabatha Cicero...

Paul Foster Case, member of the Order, founds the BOTA (Builders of Adytum), where everyone must paint their game themselves, according to Case's book; the drawing differs slightly from Waite, and has the Minors abstracted.

 

History, technology and survival

 

What is fascinating when one approaches the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn is to see how this structure so brief - from 1887 to 1903: barely sixteen years! - Has dared to touch all areas of occultism, both Western and Eastern, has carried out a gigantic synthesis of contradictory or unusual teachings, and has influenced all the schools of the 20th century throughout the English- and French-speaking world. Audacities forged by Golden Dawn seekers are considered gospel by many esoteric groups, either directly from Golden Dawn because they were founded by a former member, or indirectly through the discovery of their work and the adaptation of the said works to their own research. We are going to see first of all which are the researchers whose discoveries or affirmations have been used by the GD; then we will see the history of the Order itself, and finally the continuators of the GD and its current influence.

 

Masters of the Golden Dawn

 

We can first see a theoretician of ceremonial magic, Cornelius Agrippa, whose work was centered on the analogies between objects, elements, man, and the cosmos. Acting on one according to certain rules, one could act on the other by way of sympathy and by the union of all in all. Henri-Corneille Agrippa de Nettesheim, (1486-1535) is a man who alternately occupies multiple official functions, as theologian, philosopher, linguist, jurist and astrologer, zigzagging with the hunters of the Inquisition who want the head of this man free from any school. His books are a classic reference on talismans and other magic rituals. If the name of Paracelsus (1493-1541) is not unknown to the GD, it is Agrippa who is the "essential" base. Another important base, although much more obscure, will be the angelic system developed by John Dee, (1527-1608), Welsh scholar, following revelations seen in rock crystal by the medium Kelly, visions that Dee took notes. He explains three magics: natural (by sympathy), acting on the elemental; mathematics (numbers and figures) for the celestial world; and religious, acting on the supra-celestial world through a kabbalistic system based on angels. This system includes a true new language, with grammar, syntax, symbolism, only adapted to the angels who can come called by their true names. This carries with it enormous and illegible implications, which Dee called “the Enochian”, in reference to Enoch who was taken up to heaven without dying.

 

Enochian magick is one of the pillars of the secret teaching of the GD. Good books (in English) have been devoted to him, and a divinatory game was even developed a short time ago in order to facilitate the evocative work of the follower. Of course, the great classics of alchemy (Corpus Hermeticus, the Fama Fraternitatis, the Confessio Fraternitatis) and grimoires (especially the Clavicles of Solomon and the Book of Abramelin the Wise) are also used, dissected, reworked and reorganized.

The vogue aroused by Francis Barrett's "The Magus" (1801) grew steadily, despite the blunders with which it was riddled, to the point that Barrett founded a magic association, of which Montagne Summers (1880-1948) and Frédérick Hockley were members. But France will have a great part in the elaboration of the rituals of the future Order: indeed, one of the avowed references of the GD is Papus, jointly with Eliphas Lévi and Court de Gébelin.The old methods and the slow technological revolution since the liturgical catechism. appeared as a trophy . The stigmata are an alchemical ordeal and the symbolism of the way of the cross of an initiation. The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn

 

The references

 

Papus (1865-1916) began to write in 1884, at the age of 19, and his written work - like his occult work as founder and unifier of various traditions - was followed with passion across the Channel.

 

Eliphas Lévi (1810-1875) is considered the Great Kabbalist of the century, and his books are scrutinized, dissected, commented on with feverishness. He made known Antoine Court de Gébelin who had revealed the secrets of the primitive world in 1775 and who had given back to the game of tarot peddled in the countryside its letters of nobility.

 

The efforts of the Parisian Rosicrucians (Stanislas de Guaita, Joséphin Péladan) resuscitate the old dream of reviving all these specifically Western forgotten heritages, in the face of the growing Orientophilia due to Madame Blavatski's Theosophy: the Templars and their rites, the Rose+ Cross and their alchemy, the druids and their Celtic secrets, the Egyptian gods and the strength of their symbols, the Enochian mysteries revealed to John Dee and still untapped, divination and communication with the Invisible as sources of esoteric knowledge... Further energized in London by the lightning advances of the Theosophical Society, revealing an invisible world to converse with, and the demonstrations of the spiritualist Douglas-Home, the project is becoming more and more 'in tune with the times'.

 

The founders

 

It was to originate in the minds of three Freemason friends who were also members of the "Societas Rosicruciana In Anglia" (SRIA): Doctor William Wynn Westcott, (friend of Mme Blavatski, reader of John Dee, and Grand- Master of the Societas from 1878); Samuel Liddel Mathers, who later styled himself MacGregor Mathers, claiming descent from the Scottish Clan MacGregor; and William Robert Woodman their friend. One will note in the same Societas Kenneth Mackenzie, admirer of Eliphas Lévi whom he had gone to meet in Paris, and Doctor Felkin. All these names will become familiar to you, because it is around them, and barely a dozen other names, that everything will be built.The foundation : One of the legends has it that the seer Frédérick Hockley, pupil of Francis Barrett and teacher of Mackenzie, died in 1885, leaving behind him a vast library, including manuscripts encrypted with probably a code of the "Polygraphy" of the Abbé Tritheme, initiator of Cornelius Agrippa.

Woodford, a friend of Mackenzie, receives these documents from him. He is not a Mason, but knows Westcott's taste for grimoires. He hands her the texts, which Westcott passes on to Mathers for decoding. In these manuscripts, which turn out to be abbreviated kabbalistic notes, Westcott finds the address of a Rosicrucian connected with the oldest and surest branch of the original true Rose+Cross, Die Goldenne Dammerung (The Dawn Doree): Anna Sprengel, in Nuremberg. He contacted her immediately and obtained the right to establish an English branch of the Order of the Rose+Croix under the name of The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, which was done in 1887. Mathers was named Imperator. The first Temple (equivalent to a Masonic Lodge) was opened in 1888 under the name of Isis-Urania. Recruitment is rapid among the Brothers of the Societas, but the Order is also open to non-Masons, and to women. In 1891, Mathers announced the death of Anna Sprengel and the decision to continue working outside the "third Order", the German Rose+Croix. The GD then included an external order, and since 1892 two internal orders, where all the decisions concerning the rituals and the axes of work were taken. Woodman died in 1891. Westcott and Mathers remain sole leaders of the Order.

 

Secret names and ranks

 

The custom of “nomen” in Latin, the sacred language of the Rosicrucians, is established: at the rank of Neophyte, a nomen was chosen. The texts of the Order sent to the followers bore as signature the initials of the nomen of the author. For example, note that of Mathers: Frater Deo Duce and Comite Ferro (DDCF), that of Westcott: Frater Sapere Aude (SA), that of Anna Sprengel: Soror Sapiens Dominabitur Astris (SDA). One will be struck by the resemblance to the customs of the Strict Templar Observance of Germany, transformed into a Masonic rite known as the “Rectified Scottish Regime” by the Lyonnais occultist Jean-Baptiste Willermoz in 1785. The decoration of the temples and numbers of accessories or costumes were heavily inspired by ancient Egypt, apart from the symbolic creations specific to the GD. Here are the names of the ranks of the Outer Order (Golden Dawn): Neophyte, Zealator, Theoricus, Practicus, Philosophus. In the Inner Order (Ordo Rosae Rubae et Aurae Crucis) (The Red Rose and the Golden Cross), nine months after the ceremony of the Portal or the Veil of the Temple, one received the degree of Adeptus Minor which was subdivided into Zelator Adeptus and Theoricus Adeptus; then came the ranks of Adeptus Major, and finally Adeptus Exemptus. The chiefs carried, in the Third Order, the titles of Magister Templi, Magus and finally of Ipsissimus.

 

Teaching content

 

Let us now see the panorama of what the follower of the Golden Dawn must know, or experience, or deepen, aided in this by strict rituals and finicky astrological calendars: 1) To the rank of Neophyte was given a partial view of all the activities of the Order, and of the already important rituals such as the Qabalistic Sign of the Cross and the Minor Ritual of the Pentagram.

2) The other degrees correspond to the Tree of the Sephiroth, the ubiquitous key in the Golden Dawn at all levels; the Zelator corresponds to Malkuth, the Theoricus to Yesod, etc.

In the First Order magical works are not very developed; rather, we insist on self-knowledge through exercises such as "the Middle Pillar" based on kundalini and the Sephirotic tree, introspection, visions in drawings called Tattvas following a Hindu technique, the practice of Geomancy, Tarot, and learning the theoretical bases of Qabalah, astrology, etc. The first principles of the almighty imagination are explained and put into action, principles which will be at the origin of all the theories and methods of creative visualization of which the New Age is fond. 3) In the Second Order, ceremonial magic takes a prominent place, the Tarot is used in another way, and the Adept is supposed to master many rituals, know how to make and consecrate various objects, Lotus staff, Rose+croix personal and pantacles, knowing how to study the why and how of the rituals he once underwent in the first Order, and entering the Enochian world. 4) The Third Order was only in contact with the two founders; it was nicknamed "the Grand White Lodge of Adepts" and received its directives from "mahatmas" whom Mathers contacted, in the purest Theosophical style, by clairvoyance, astral projection, mysterious appointment, or unknowingly....Most theoretical texts have been published in English. The collection by Israel Regardie, a member of the Order, gives only the texts, with little commentary; the French version is well explained by active members of the Order; the publications of Waite or Crowley bear the mark of the remodeling due to their authors; and many followers, members or not, such as Gareth Knight, Robert Wang, Gerald Schueler, Dion Fortune, Moryason...use the techniques, sometimes adapting them. The researcher who would like to operate concretely should make a rigorous synthesis of these different sources... Unless he receives directly from a true Adept the oral teachings which accompany the texts.

And, of course, each follower calls himself “the sole holder of THE TRUE Golden Dawn”! But let's not anticipate. Let us only reflect on techniques as diverse as they are divergent, often based on subjective parapsychological phenomena and clearly affirmed traditions, brought together for the first time, the link being established by constants such as the Tarot, the Qabalah, the Enochian mysteries... Such a conflagration of diverse and passionate thoughts could only explode, both for human reasons due to the development of the pride inherent in all magic, and for purely eggregoric reasons, due to the reworking of rituals and structures as time went by. as the experiences of the Inner Order (RR and AC) impacted the Outer Order (GD).

 

The flaw

 

The flaw came to light with the departure of Doctor Westcott in 1897. The Golden Dawn had been open for ten years. The official reason for leaving is as follows: having forgotten in a "cab" official documents of the Order implicating him, Westcott was summoned by the English authorities to choose between his post of coroner (medical examiner) and his membership of the Order. Rumors about magic around the corpses did not allow a serene exercise of this profession to a follower... We can legitimately suppose that the autocratic character of Mathers was for a lot in the final choice of Westcott, founder of the first hour. Freed from any moderator, MacGregor Mathers had a field day, ruling and deciding everything. Who will be able to judge whether, on the esoteric plane, Mathers' decisions were good or not? Either way, the full powers of the Imperator began to unnerve the spirits - the embodied spirits of his co-followers.

With Westcott's departure begins the decline of the Order as such. One of the points which aroused the anger of the "rebels" was the initiation into the Order in 1898 of a young magician, Aleister Crowley, who, against the opposition of the Brothers and Sisters, was raised to the degree of Adeptus Minor ( the highest grade concretely practiced in the Interior Order) by Mathers himself at the "Ahathoor" Temple in Paris on January 16, 1900.

So much has been said of Crowley that he can't be as black as that. If his personal life was a succession of sexual debauchery and excess, his initiatory written work is fascinating, lucid and balanced. But in Victorian England, even in a secret society where angels, demons and entities roam, Crowley was seen as the reincarnation of Satan himself, a legend he maintained with that mocking smile that we see in certain photos, drawing on his pipe and loving to make the ladies in feathered hats shiver with fright...Mathers' revelation. But finally a satanic legend pays off, and a famous actress, Florence Farr, the leader of the Isis-Urania Temple in London since April 1897, resigns from her post to Mathers. And there, an incredible thing will happen, a clap of thunder in a serene sky: Mathers believes to see in this resignation an underground action of Westcott, and he answers to Florence Farr a letter, dated February 16, 1900 from Paris, which I translated here: "...I cannot let you mount a combination to create a schism with the idea of working secretly or openly under the orders of Sapere Aude (=Westcott) under the false impression that he has been given a power on the work of the Second Order by Soror Dominabitur Astris (=Anne Sprengel). So all of this forces me to tell you completely (and don't get me wrong, I can prove to the hilt every word I say here, and more...) and if I'm confronted with SA I'd say the same , if only for the love of the Order, and in these circumstances which would really kill the reputation of SA, I beg you to keep the secret from the Order for the moment, although in fact you are perfectly free to show him this, if you consider it appropriate after careful consideration".

 

"(Wescott) was NEVER in communication, at any time, either personally or in writing, with the Secret Heads of the (Third) Order, he had himself forged - or caused to be forged - the alleged correspondence between him and them , and my tongue having been bound all these years by an Oath of Secrecy intended for this purpose, lent to him, asked by him, to me, before showing me what he had done, or caused to be done, or both. You must understand that I say little on this subject, given the extreme gravity of the matter, and once again I ask you, both for his love and that of the Order, not to force me to go further forward on this subject. Mathers does not go so far as to deny the existence of Anna Sprengel - whom he confused for a time with an adventurer, Loleta Jackson, alias Madame Horos, alias Swami Viva Ananda - but the word was out: all the German Rosicrucian guarantee was a bluff, a huge bluff, as was the fanciful "History of the Order" by the same Westcott.

 

The fall of the Imperator

 

Florence waits a few days, asks Westcott for an explanation, who calmly denies it, regretting that the witnesses from the first hour are dead. Florence then divulges Mathers' letter to all the Adepts in London, who on March 3 elect a Committee of Seven to hold Mathers to account. Mathers proudly refuses to show any evidence, does not recognize any authority above him except the leaders of the Third Order. On March 23, he dismissed Florence Farr from her duties; on March 29, the Second Order meeting in plenary assembly dismissed Mathers and expelled him from the Golden Dawn, all orders combined. Mathers threatens them with all possible karmic punishments, affirms that one cannot impeach him without his agreement because of magic bonds. Crowley joins him in Paris, comes up against the secession of the Ahatoor temple, and organizes with Mathers a veritable "duel of sorcery" between them and the "rebels". It's tragic to see a mind as vast as Mathers sink in this war of leaders for a power that is crumbling anyway. Each Temple thinks of itself as the sole holder of the "true" rituals, since their personal experiences have been positive (and they were logically positive, given the magnificent work of the founders on the rituals). In addition, each Frater or Soror with a different experience - through the visualization of the Tattvas among other things - feels invested with the duty to "save the true Golden Dawn".

This phenomenon of fragmentation was precipitated by the existence of secret working groups within the Order itself, an existence desired by Mathers as early as 1897 for the purpose of deepening the knowledge acquired. Florence Farr had thus founded a group called “La Sphère”. Enter William Butler Yeats, (1865-1939) Irish, future Nobel Prize for Literature in 1923. After having been leader of Isis-Urania, he left the Order in 1901, the same year as the trial of Théo Horos. and his wife for fraud and sexual offenses, trials where the name and practices of the Golden Dawn were called into question with the distorting amplification that you can guess, and above all the publication of pieces of Ritual of the Neophyte where the oath pronounced by the recipient was considered blasphemy. The demoralizing effect on the followers of the Outer Order accentuated the ravages of the war of leaders... In 1902, the Second Order gave itself a triumvirate to lead it: PW Bullock, quickly replaced by Doctor RW Felkin; MW Blackden, Egyptologist, and JW Brodie-Inner. The tarot forms another set of beliefs, values and processes to replace them, Magdalene translated the Ark of the Covenant into a tree where the branches became cards for a deck....As far as the Golden Dawn initiation on the TOWER is concerned; the couple is falling apart, and an inevitable fight is going to happen.Translation "You must remain in control of the situation and keep your cool. Avoid saying anything that might hurt others. As far as your life is concerned, your romantic relationship may be coming to an end.

Take this as a warning - if you really care about your relationship, it's time for you to do some damage control or open up a line of communication to clear up any misunderstandings. " iation into the system of telepathic speech and quantum science was transmitted by medieval chivalry, which brought to the West the sacred science that had survived in the East. The knight is this transmitting agent, and he inspired the language of the alchemists, which symbolises the force that enables a chemical reaction and therefore a transformation of matter. In chemistry, transmutation has not yet been mastered, but it is a common phenomenon among alchemists. Alchemists are Initiates or, better still, Adepts.

 

www.ledifice.net/7215-3.html

 

The initiatory process for accessing the coded language of the ancient knights probably came to the USA via Rosicrucians inspired by wonderful tales such as The Alchemical Wedding attributed to the name of Christian Rozenkreuz or Goethe's The Wonderful Tale and the Beautiful Lily. Both drew their inspiration from Eastern philosophers, as did Dante, Shakespeare and Hugo. The initiation process was adapted to the tarot deck by Marie Magdalena . Mary Magdalene and Jesus, two great Essene initiates, when they came to Earth, their souls split into five parts to incarnate in as many different bodies. This journey took place between the Resurrection in 33 AD and the Ascension in 73 AD. During these years, Mary Magdalene, Jesus and their children travelled through France, the Netherlands and England. Later, Mary Magdalene and Jesus travelled to Spain, where they met Mary of Bethany and her daughter Sarah. Magda left us the tarot as a tutorial for accessing pure consciousness free of the ego that came mainly from the Romans and was unfortunately taken over by. Rome and therefore by the various occupants of a high command located on the banks of the Tiber. The genesis of the Golden Dawn. is to take our spiritual history early and rediscover this primordial alignment between earthly and cosmic forces. The initiatory process, represented by the imagiers of the Middle Ages, was left dormant in Marseille by Magda. Magda, with her tarot perhaps drawn in the Baumes cave not far from Marseille, has survived to this day. The founders of Golden Dawn asked the Rider Waite Smith trio to recreate a more modern system of representation than the tarot left by Magda and already illustrated by imagiers keen on coded language. Example our knight has worked well, he's a good knight, good night...

 

The image shows the path to follow to become a magician like Magda or, from a more recent, slightly phallocratic and Western point of view, a magician like Jesus.

 

We start with the knight of the sword, and the sword is the intellect. The tower here by. Strasbourg (birth of the free masons). it's this card which sees two guys fall. in jest, it's the loss of ego and weightlessness useful for splitting the soul into thirds. The ace. de baton is the one that Hermes Trimegoiste receives but. it is also that of Moses, it became. the caduceus of. doctors. The page of pentacle brings the philosophical gold to make this transmutation made possible by the operating mode.

 

The Knight of Swords is often taken to represent a confident and articulate young man, who may act impulsively. The problem is that this Knight, though visionary, is unrealistic. He fights bravely, but foolishly. In some illustrations, he is shown to have forgotten his armor or his helmet.A young man stands alone in a field. Pretty flowers, a ploughed field and fruit trees surround him, symbols of the harvest and Abundance to come. He is holding a Denarius in his hand. He looks at it intently. He studies it. The sky is clear. This Jack is quietly building his road to material success.

 

Like all the Jacks in the Tarot, the Jack of Pence represents a beginning, the first stages of a project. The Suit of Pence is the Suit associated with the Earth Element, material possessions and everything we hold dear - our health, our values, our skills. The Jack of Pence symbolises an awareness of the importance of all the material aspects of life. Wands are associated with fire energy, and the Ace of Wands is the core representation of fire within the deck. The card shows a hand that is sticking out of a cloud while holding the wand.

 

When we look at this card, we can see that the hand is reaching out to offer the wand, which is still growing. Some of the leaves from the wand have sprouted, which is meant to represent spiritual and material balance and progress. In the distance is a castle that symbolizes opportunities available in the future.The Ace of Wands calls out to you to follow your instincts. If you think that the project that you've been dreaming of is a good idea, and then just go ahead and do it. The Tower card depicts a high spire nestled on top of the mountain. A lightning bolt strikes the tower which sets it ablaze. Flames are bursting in the windows and people are jumping out of the windows as an act of desperation. They perhaps signal the same figures we see chained in the Devil card earlier. They want to escape the turmoil and destruction within. The Tower is a symbol for the ambition that is constructed on faulty premises. The destruction of the tower must happen in order to clear out the old ways and welcome something new. Its revelations can come in a flash of truth or inspiration.

 

Symbolism of the House of God or the House of God? or Tower for Rider-Waite-Smith in Golden Dawn system: the decisive question of the determinant in the name of the card. I've just been talking about language. And when it comes to language, it's important to be aware of the name of the card. It's a curious name for a tower, alas a dungeon, a fortress used both to protect itself from enemies and to symbolise its power and mark out its territory. It's hard to make the connection between a house and a fortified tower (there are crenellations). The name on the card doesn't match the drawing: symbolism behind it. Joy! Some anti-Cathos tarot cards, generally from the 19th century, call the card the House of God. Wrong! It is not the House of God. It is the House of God. Or Maison Dieu. This also requires a few notes.

The House of God leaves no room for ambiguity: it's a church, a place of worship. The tarot card is not to be taken as such.

The medieval house of God is something else again. "Another meaning of house, "building for specialised use" (12th c.), gave rise to a large number of expressions that appeared in Old French, then again in the 19th-20th c.: the oldest are based on the assimilation between the house and the temple of God (c. 1120, maison Dieu): the hospital where the poor were housed and cared for also received the name Maison Dieu (1165), analogous to hôtel-Dieu, and convents and monasteries that of maison (1165).".

The Maison-Dieu gave rise to legions of small villages and hamlets, particularly on the route to Santiago de Compostela.

Any esoteric researcher knows that when they come across villages with this name, they can stop. The likelihood of finding something symbolic, esoteric or occult in the area is relatively high. God's house (today in US Golden Dawn) is therefore a building where the poor, the sick and pilgrims can find refuge, comfort and care. We're a long way from Babel!.....? And if I remember the meaning of the card[2] at level 2, I'd be happy to add the following: "There is nothing in this world, apart from the spirit, that should not perish from slow or sudden dissociation. Heaven is outside. It is also within. And when its fire consumes or sets ablaze, strips the skin or strikes with lightning, it is always because a fault has been committed against harmony and disorder has arisen... This is how accidents, illnesses, cancers, revolutions and wars arise. Thus perish empires, peoples and races: from false notes." As always, there are many ideological undertones with the Rosicrucians. Food for thought.

 

www.vincentbeckers-cours-de-tarot.net/maison-dieu-symboli...

 

The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn was founded by persons claiming to be in communication with the Secret Chiefs. One of these Secret Chiefs (or a person in contact with them) was supposedly the (probably fictional) Anna Sprengel, whose name and address were allegedly decoded from the Cipher Manuscripts by William Wynn Westcott. In 1892, S. MacGregor Mathers (another founder) claimed that he had contacted these Secret Chiefs independently of Sprengel, and that this confirmed his position as head of the Golden Dawn.[1] He declared this in a manifesto four years later saying that they were human and living on Earth, yet possessed terrible superhuman powers.[1] He used this status to found the Second Order within the Golden Dawn,[2] and to introduce the Adeptus Minor ritual. The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (Latin: Ordo Hermeticus Aurorae Aureae), more commonly the Golden Dawn (Aurora Aurea), was a secret society devoted to the study and practice of occult Hermeticism and metaphysics during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Known as a magical order, the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn was active in Great Britain and focused its practices on theurgy and spiritual development. Many present-day concepts of ritual and magic that are at the centre of contemporary traditions, such as Wicca[1] and Thelema, were inspired by the Golden Dawn, which became one of the largest single influences on 20th-century Western occultism.[ The three founders, William Robert Woodman, William Wynn Westcott and Samuel Liddell Mathers, were Freemasons. Westcott appears to have been the initial driving force behind the establishment of the Golden Dawn. The Golden Dawn system was based on hierarchy and initiation, similar to Masonic lodges; however, women were admitted on an equal basis with men. The "Golden Dawn" was the first of three Orders, although all three are often collectively referred to as the "Golden Dawn". The First Order taught esoteric philosophy based on the Hermetic Qabalah and personal development through study and awareness of the four classical elements, as well as the basics of astrology, tarot divination, and geomancy. The Second or Inner Order, the Rosae Rubeae et Aureae Crucis, taught magic, including scrying, astral travel, and alchemy. The Third Order was that of the Secret Chiefs, who were said to be highly skilled; they supposedly directed the activities of the lower two orders by spirit communication with the Chiefs of the Second Order.

The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn has been considered one of the most important Western magical systems for over a century. Although much of their knowledge has been published, to really enter the system required initiation within a Golden Dawn temple--until now. Regardless of your magical knowledge or background, you can learn and live the Golden Dawn tradition with the first practical guide to Golden Dawn initiation. Self-Initiation into the Golden Dawn Tradition by Chic and Sandra Tabatha Cicero offers self-paced instruction by two senior adepts of this magical order. For the first time, the esoteric rituals of the Golden Dawn are clearly laid out in step-by-step guidance that's clear and easy-to-follow. Studying the Knowledge Lectures, practicing daily rituals, doing meditations, and taking self-graded exams will enhance your learning. Initiation rituals have been correctly reinterpreted so you can perform them yourself. Upon completion of this workbook, you can truly say that you are practicing the Golden Dawn tradition with an in-depth knowledge of qabalah, astrology, Tarot, geomancy, spiritual alchemy, and more, all of which you will learn from Self-Initiation into the Golden Dawn Tradition. No need for group membership

Instructions are free of jargon and complex language

Lessons don't require familiarity with magical traditions

Grade rituals from Neophyte to Porta. Link with your Higher Self

If you have ever wondered what it would be like to learn the Golden Dawn system, Self-Initiation into the Golden Dawn Tradition explains it all. The lessons follow a structured plan, adding more and more information with each section of the book. Did you really learn the material? Find out by using the written tests and checking them with the included answers. Here is a chance to find out if the Golden Dawn system is the right path for you or to add any part of their wisdom and techniques to the system you follow. Start with this book now. At the beginning of the twentieth century the esoteric order of the Golden Dawn deposited part of its magical wisdom in Tarot decks. The Golden Dawn Magical Tarot uses symbology and colours as adhered to by the Order of the Golden Dawn. The major arcana show abstract and very vibrant scenes, but the minors are overly repetitive. Little changes between the cards of a suit but the number of cups or pentacles.More than thirty years ago, U.S. Games Systems published the The Golden Dawn Tarot, revealing for the first time many truths and secrets of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, and its interpretation of the tarot. The card designs follow the symbolic framework of the Inner Tradition. The foundational documents of the original Order of the Golden Dawn, known as the Cipher Manuscripts, are written in English using the Trithemius cipher. The manuscripts give the specific outlines of the Grade Rituals of the Order and prescribe a curriculum of graduated teachings that encompass the Hermetic Qabalah, astrology, occult tarot, geomancy, and alchemy. According to the records of the Order, the manuscripts passed from Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, a Masonic scholar, to the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, whom British occult writer Francis King describes as the fourth founder[2] (although Woodford died shortly after the Order was founded).[3] The documents did not excite Woodford, and in February 1886 he passed them on to Freemason William Wynn Westcott, who managed to decode them in 1887.[2] Westcott, pleased with his discovery, called on fellow Freemason Samuel Liddell MacGregor Mathers for a second opinion. Westcott asked for Mathers' help to turn the manuscripts into a coherent system for lodge work. Mathers, in turn, asked fellow Freemason William Robert Woodman to assist the two, and he accepted.[2] Mathers and Westcott have been credited with developing the ritual outlines in the Cipher Manuscripts into a workable format.[c] Mathers, however, is generally credited with the design of the curriculum and rituals of the Second Order, which he called the Rosae Rubae et Aureae Crucis ("Ruby Rose and Golden Cross" or the RR et AC).

 

www.loscarabeo.com/en/products/tarocchi-iniziatici-della-...

 

A. E. Waite and A. Crowley were inspired by that philosophy, as well as famous poets, intellectuals and artists. Today the Golden Dawn Tarot comes back to light in a new form that translate the secret instructions transmitted only to the initiates of the Brotherhood into extraordinary images.

In a professional draw, The Magician, also known as The Bateleur, indicates that you are highly competent in your field, and that you know how to use your skills and knowledge to achieve your professional goals. So use your natural talents to shine! This is not the time to lose self-confidence, to hide or worse to minimise the extent of your abilities. On the contrary! Show what you can do, and accept the challenges that come your way.

 

From a slightly more divinatory point of view, you can also expect to receive positive feedback from your manager or a potential employer.In esoteric decks, occultists, starting with Oswald Wirth, turned Le Bateleur from a mountebank into a magus. The curves of the magician's hat brim in the Marseilles image are similar to the esoteric deck's mathematical sign of infinity. Similarly, other symbols were added. The essentials are that the magician has set up a temporary table outdoors, to display items that represent the suits of the Minor Arcana: Cups, Coins, Swords (as knives). The fourth, the baton (Clubs) he holds in his hand. The baton was later changed to represent a literal magician's wand.

 

The illustration of the tarot card "The Magician" from the Rider–Waite tarot deck was developed by A. E. Waite for the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn in 1910. Waite's magician features the infinity symbol over his head, and an ouroboros belt, both symbolizing eternity. The figure stands among a garden of flowers, to imply the manifestation and cultivation of desires.

 

In French Le Bateleur, "the mountebank" or the "sleight of hand artist", is a practitioner of stage magic. The Italian tradition calls him Il Bagatto or Il Bagatello. The Mantegna Tarocchi image that would seem to correspond with the Magician is labeled Artixano, the Artisan; he is the second lowest in the series, outranking only the Beggar. Visually the 18th-century woodcuts reflect earlier iconic representations, and can be compared to the free artistic renditions in the 15th-century hand-painted tarots made for the Visconti and Sforza families. In the painted cards attributed to Bonifacio Bembo, the Magician appears to be playing with cups and balls. How can we put our spiritual knowledge and beliefs into practice on a daily basis? That's the question posed by Le Magicien. How do you go from thinking of spirituality as a series of intellectual concepts to actually living them? How can you apply them to embody your Authentic Being and bring to life what you really want?

 

The Magician indicates that these answers are already within you and that you have the tools - symbolised by the Tarot Suits on the table - to move towards self-fulfilment. The Magician is very 'hands-on' and advises you to test to find what gives you the greatest sense of well-being and grounding; to practise your Magic to develop yourself and reach your full potential. Intuitive practices create the link between Body, Soul and Spirit... Open your Heart to Intuition and practise!

vivre-intuitif.com/apprendre-le-tarot/signification/majeu...

The Magician - or Bateleur in the Tarot de Marseille - points his wand towards Heaven, while his other hand points towards Earth. This gesture signifies that he captures the Energy of the Universe, that it flows through him, to manifest itself in the world, in everyday life. In front of him, the attributes of the four Tarot Suits are placed on the table: a Rod, a Cup, a Sword and a Denarius. Each represents an Element: Fire, Water, Air and Earth. The magician thus has everything at his disposal to manifest his dreams and desires, to materialize them, to make them possible, tangible. In this Energy, the possibilities are infinite, as underlined by the symbol above his head and belt, a snake biting its own tail. The Magician is associated with the planet Mercury, the planet of competence, logic and intelligence. His number is 1, the number of beginnings. The Magician , also known as The Magus or The Juggler, is the first trump or Major Arcana card in most traditional tarot decks. It is used in game playing and divination; in the English-speaking world, the divination meaning is much better known. Within the card game context, the equivalent is the Pagat which is the lowest trump card, also known as the atouts or honours. In the occult context, the trump cards are recontextualized as the Major Arcana and granted complex esoteric meaning. The Magician in such context is interpreted as the first numbered and second total card of the Major Arcana, succeeding the Fool, which is unnumbered or marked 0. The Magician as an object of occult study is interpreted as symbolic of power, potential, and the unification of the physical and spiritual worlds. The Magician is one tarot card that is filled with symbolism. The central figure depicts someone with one hand pointed to the sky, while the other hand points to the ground, as if to say "as above, so below". This is a rather complicated phrase, but its summarization is that earth reflects heaven, the outer world reflects within, the microcosm reflects the macrocosm, earth reflects God. It can also be interpreted here that the magician symbolizes the ability to act as a go-between between the world above and the contemporary, human world. On his table, the magician also wields all the suits of the tarot. This symbolizes the four elements being connected by this magician - the four elements being earth, water, air, and fire. The infinity sign on his head indicates the infinite possibilities of creation with the will. Upright Magician Meaning. The Magician is the representation of pure willpower. With the power of the elements and the suits, he takes the potential innate in the fool and molds it into being with the power of desire. He is the connecting force between heaven and earth, for he understands the meaning behind the words "as above so below" - that mind and world are only reflections of one another. Remember that you are powerful, create your inner world, and the outer will follow. Remember that you are powerful, create your inner world, and the outer will follow. When you get the Magician in your reading, it might mean that it's time to tap into your full potential without hesitation. It might be in your new job, new business venture, a new love or something else. It shows that the time to take action is now and any signs of holding back would mean missing the opportunity of becoming the best version of yourself. Certain choices will have to be made and these can bring great changes to come. Harness some of the Magician's power to make the world that you desire most.

labyrinthos.co/blogs/tarot-card-meanings-list/the-magicia...

 

Symbolism

Rider–Waite

If The Fool - The Mate symbolises the desire to discover, The Magician is "The Alchemist" of the Major Arcana, the one who can create everything from nothing, transforming lead into gold. The Magician card is therefore the card of "manifestation" par excellence, i.e. to make possible, to concretise and to have an impact on one's environment and the world. The Magician is a card that highlights your unique talents... unique talents that serve your unique and authentic desires.

 

With the Magician, success is within reach. You're ready to use your abilities and skills to achieve your goals. The desire to do something new, to start a cycle, is very strong. In Magician's Energy, you feel optimistic and in a conquering frame of mind. You're able to use all the resources at your disposal to achieve this: your skills, those close to you and all the tools - intuitive or otherwise - that are at your disposal.

 

The Magician is a card that also evokes concentration and focus. So this is not the time to spread yourself too thin or try to do everything at once. It's all about staying focused on a single objective and putting all your energy and resources into it. The Magician warns against distractions, or even temptations, that could lead you astray and compromise the achievement of your objective.

  

The Magician is depicted with one hand pointing upwards towards the sky and the other pointing down to the earth, interpreted widely as an "as above, so below" reference to the spiritual and physical realms. On the table before him are a wand, a pentacle, a sword, and a cup, representing the four suits of the Minor Arcana. Such symbols signify the classical elements of fire, earth, air, and water, "which lie like counters before the adept, and he adapts them as he wills". The Magician's right hand, pointed upwards, holds a double-ended white wand; the ends are interpreted much like the hand gestures, in that they represent the Magician's status as conduit between the spiritual and the physical. His robe is similarly also white, a symbol of purity yet also of inexperience, while his red mantle is understood through the lens of red's wildly polarised colour symbolism—both a representative of willpower and passion, and one of egotism, rage, and revenge. In front of the Magician is a garden of Rose of Sharon roses and lily of the valley lillies....

 

Fairy Tale of the Green Snake and the Beautiful Lily from Goethe, Johann Wolfgang was demonstrating the "culture of aspiration", or the Magician's ability to cultivate and fulfill potential of the ouroboros wo symbolized the Green Snake in this tale, the Magician is an. alchemist. The Magician is associated with the planet Mercury the Ouroboros alchemist , and hence the signs of Gemini the two will-o-wisp and Virgo Lily in astrology.

 

Marseilles

Although the Rider–Waite Tarot deck is the most often used in occult contexts, other decks such as the Tarot of Marseilles usually used for game-playing have also been read through a symbolic lens. Alejandro Jodorowsky's reading of the Magician as Le Bateleur draws attention to individual details of the Marseilles card, such as the fingers, table, and depiction of the plants, in addition to the elements shared between the Rider–Waite and Marseilles decks.[10] The Magician in the Marseilles deck is depicted with six fingers on his left hand rather than five, which Jodorowsky interprets as a symbol of manipulating and reorganizing reality. Similarly, the table he stands behind has three legs rather than four; the fourth leg is interpreted as being outside the card, a metafictional statement that "[i]t is by going beyond the stage of possibilities and moving into the reality of action and choice that The Magician gives concrete expression to his situation". Rather than flowers, the Magician of the Marseilles deck is depicted with a small plant between his feet. The plant has a yonic appearance and has been interpreted as the sex organs of either a personal mother or the abstract concept of Mother Nature.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magician_(tarot_card)

  

Divination

Like the other cards of the Major Arcana, the Magician is the subject of complex and extensive analysis as to its occult interpretations. On the broad level, the Magician is interpreted with energy, potential, and the manifestation of one's desires; the card symbolizes the meetings of the physical and spiritual worlds ("as above, so below") and the conduit converting spiritual energy into real-world action.

 

Tarot experts have defined the Magician in association with the Fool, which directly precedes it in the sequence; Rachel Pollack refers to the card as "in the image of the trickster-wizard". A particularly important aspect of the card's visual symbolism in the Rider–Waite deck is the magician's hands, with one hand pointing towards the sky and the other towards the earth. Pollack and other writers understand this as a reflection of the Hermetic concept of "as above, so below", where the workings of the macrocosm (the universe as a whole, understood as a living being) and the microcosm (the human being, understood as a universe) are interpreted as inherently intertwined with one another. To Pollack, the Magician is a metaphysical lightning rod, channeling macrocosmic energy into the microcosm.

 

According to A. E. Waite's 1910 book Pictorial Key To The Tarot, the Magician card is associated with the divine motive in man. In particular, Waite interprets the Magician through a Gnostic lens, linking the card's connection with the number eight (which the infinity symbol is visually related to) and the Gnostic concept of the Ogdoad, spiritual rebirth into a hidden eighth celestial realm. Said infinity symbol above the Magician's head is also interpreted as a symbol of the Holy Spirit, the prophetic and theophanic aspect of the Trinity. Like other tarot cards, the symbolism of the Magician is interpreted differently depending on whether the card is drawn in an upright or reversed position. While the upright Magician represents potential and tapping into one's talents, the reversed Magician's potential and talents are unfocused and unmanifested. The reversed Magician can also be interpreted as related to black magick and to madness or mental distress.[14] A particularly important interpretation of the reversed Magician relates to the speculated connection between the experiences recognized in archaic societies as shamanism and those recognized in technological societies as schizophrenia; the reversed Magician is perceived as symbolizing the degree to which those experiences and abilities are unrecognized and suppressed, and the goal is to turn the card 'upright', or re-focus those experiences into their positive form.

 

In art

The Surrealist (Le surréaliste), 1947, is a painting by Victor Brauner. The Juggler provided Brauner with a key prototype for his self-portrait: the Surrealist's large hat, medieval costume, and the position of his arms all derive from this figure who, like Brauner's subject, stands behind a table displaying a knife, a goblet, and coins.

 

www.amazon.fr/Self-Initiation-into-Golden-Dawn-Tradition/...

 

Founding of the First Temple

In October 1887, Westcott claimed to have written to a German countess and prominent Rosicrucian named Anna Sprengel, whose address was said to have been found in the decoded Cipher Manuscripts. According to Westcott, Sprengel claimed the ability to contact certain supernatural entities, known as the Secret Chiefs, that were considered the authorities over any magical order or esoteric organization. Westcott purportedly received a reply from Sprengel granting permission to establish a Golden Dawn temple and conferring honorary grades of Adeptus Exemptus on Westcott, Mathers, and Woodman. The temple was to consist of the five grades outlined in the manuscripts.

 

In 1888, the Isis-Urania Temple was founded in London. In contrast to the S.R.I.A. and Masonry,[6] women were allowed and welcome to participate in the Order in "perfect equality" with men. The Order was more of a philosophical and metaphysical teaching order in its early years. Other than certain rituals and meditations found in the Cipher manuscripts and developed further, "magical practices" were generally not taught at the first temple. For the first four years, the Golden Dawn was one cohesive group later known as the "First Order" or "Outer Order". A "Second Order" or "Inner Order" was established and became active in 1892. The Second Order consisted of members known as "adepts", who had completed the entire course of study for the First Order. The Second Order was formally established under the name Ordo Rosae Rubeae et Aureae Crucis (the Order of the Red Rose and the Golden Cross) Eventually, the Osiris temple in Weston-super-Mare, the Horus temple in Bradford (both in 1888), and the Amen-Ra temple in Edinburgh (1893) were founded. In 1893 Mathers founded the Ahathoor temple in Paris.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermetic_Order_of_the_Golden_Dawn

Secret Chiefs: in various occultist movements, Secret Chiefs are said to be transcendent cosmic authorities, a spiritual hierarchy responsible for the operation and moral calibre of the cosmos, or for overseeing the operations of an esoteric organization that manifests outwardly in the form of a magical order or lodge system. Their names and descriptions have varied through time, differing among those who have claimed experience of contact with them. They are variously held to exist on higher planes of being or to be incarnate; if incarnate, they may be described as being gathered at some special location, such as Shambhala, or scattered through the world working anonymously. One early and influential source on these entities is Karl von Eckartshausen, whose The Cloud upon the Sanctuary, published in 1795, explained in some detail their character and motivations. Several 19th and 20th century occultists claimed to belong to or to have contacted these Secret Chiefs and made these communications known to others: Aleister Crowley (who used the term to refer to members of the upper three grades of his order, A∴A∴), Dion Fortune (who called them the "esoteric order"), and Max Heindel (who called them the "Elder Brothers").

While in Algeria in 1909, Aleister Crowley, along with Victor Neuburg, recited numerous Enochian Calls or Aires. After the fifteenth Aire, he declared that he had attained the grade of Magister Templi (Master of the Temple), which meant that he was now on the level of these Secret Chiefs, although this declaration caused many occultists to stop taking him seriously if they had not done so already. He also described this attainment as a possible and in fact a necessary step for all who truly followed his path.[a] In 1947, when Aleister Crowley died, he left behind a sketch of one of the Secret Chiefs, Crowley's invisible mentor that he called LAM. The sketch looks like a grey alien. The church invisible, invisible church, mystical church or church mystical, is a Christian theological concept of an "invisible" Christian Church of the elect who are known only to God, in contrast to the "visible church"—that is, the institutional body on earth which preaches the gospel and administers the sacraments. Every member of the invisible church is "saved", while the visible church contains all individuals who are saved though also having some who are "unsaved".[1] According to this view, Bible passages such as Matthew 7:21–27, Matthew 13:24–30, and Matthew 24:29–51 speak about this distinction.

 

Views on the relation with Visible church

Distinction between two churches

The first person in church history to introduce a view of an invisible and a visible church is Clement of Alexandria. Some have also argued that Jovinian and Vigilantius held an invisible church view.

 

The concept was advocated by St Augustine of Hippo as part of his refutation of the Donatist sect, though he, as other Church Fathers before him, saw the invisible Church and visible Church as one and the same thing, unlike the later Protestant reformers who did not identify the Catholic Church as the true church.[8] He was strongly influenced by the Platonist belief that true reality is invisible and that, if the visible reflects the invisible, it does so only partially and imperfectly (see theory of forms). Others question whether Augustine really held to some form of an "invisible true Church" concept.

 

The concept was insisted upon during the Protestant reformation as a way of distinguishing between the "visible" Roman Catholic Church, which according to the Reformers was corrupt, and those within it who truly believe, as well as true believers within their own denominations. John Calvin described the church invisible as "that which is actually in God's presence, into which no persons are received but those who are children of God by grace of adoption and true members of Christ by sanctification of the Holy Spirit... [The invisible church] includes not only the saints presently living on earth, but all the elect from the beginning of the world." He continues in contrasting this church with the church scattered throughout the world. "In this church there is a very large mixture of hypocrites, who have nothing of Christ but the name and outward appearance..." (Institutes 4.1.7) Richard Hooker distinguished "between the mystical Church and the visible Church", the former of which is "known only to God."[11]

 

John Wycliffe, who was a precursor to the reformation, also believed in an invisible church made of the predestinated elect. Another precursor of the reformation, Johann Ruchrat von Wesel believed in a distinction between the visible and invisible church.

 

Pietism later took this a step further, with its formulation of ecclesiolae in ecclesia ("little churches within the church").

 

Non-distinction

Roman Catholic theology, reacting against the protestant concept of an invisible Church, emphasized the visible aspect of the Church founded by Christ, but in the twentieth century placed more stress on the interior life of the Church as a supernatural organism, identifying the Church, as in the encyclical Mystici corporis Christi of Pope Pius XII, with the Mystical Body of Christ. In Catholic doctrine, the one true Church is the visible society founded by Christ, namely, the Catholic Church under the global jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome.

  

This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (September 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

This encyclical rejected two extreme views of the Church:

 

A rationalistic or purely sociological understanding of the Church, according to which it is merely a human organization with structures and activities, is mistaken. The visible Church and its structures do exist but the Church is more, as it is guided by the Holy Spirit:

Although the juridical principles, on which the Church rests and is established, derive from the divine constitution given to it by Christ and contribute to the attaining of its supernatural end, nevertheless that which lifts the Society of Christians far above the whole natural order is the Spirit of our Redeemer who penetrates and fills every part of the Church.

An exclusively mystical understanding of the Church is mistaken as well, because a mystical "Christ in us" union would deify its members and mean that the acts of Christians are simultaneously the acts of Christ. The theological concept una mystica persona (one mystical person) refers not to an individual relation but to the unity of Christ with the Church and the unity of its members with him in her. This is where we can find direct contrast to Christian philosophy like the preachings of Rev.Jesse Lee Peterson, yet the personification is similar. There is another view, that contrasts these two school-of-thought, and that is from Albert Eduard Meier, as he includes Electric Theory in his teachings, similar to Creationism.

Eastern Orthodox theologian Vladimir Lossky too characterizes as a "Nestorian ecclesiology" that which would "divide the Church into distinct beings: on the one hand a heavenly and invisible Church, alone true and absolute; on the other, the earthly Church (or rather 'the churches'), imperfect and relative".

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_invisible

  

The fall of the Imperator

 

Florence waits a few days, asks Westcott for an explanation, who calmly denies it, regretting that the witnesses from the first hour are dead. Florence then divulges Mathers' letter to all the Adepts in London, who on March 3 elect a Committee of Seven to hold Mathers to account. Mathers proudly refuses to show any evidence, does not recognize any authority above him except the leaders of the Third Order.

 

On March 23, he dismissed Florence Farr from her duties; on March 29, the Second Order meeting in plenary assembly dismissed Mathers and expelled him from the Golden Dawn, all orders combined. Mathers threatens them with all possible karmic punishments, affirms that one cannot impeach him without his agreement because of magic bonds.

 

Crowley joins him in Paris, comes up against the secession of the Ahatoor temple, and organizes with Mathers a veritable "duel of sorcery" between them and the "rebels". It's tragic to see a mind as vast as Mathers sink in this war of leaders for a power that is crumbling anyway.

 

Each Temple thinks of itself as the sole holder of the "true" rituals, since their personal experiences have been positive (and they were logically positive, given the magnificent work of the founders on the rituals). In addition, each Frater or Soror with a different experience - through the visualization of the Tattvas among other things - feels invested with the duty to "save the true Golden Dawn".

 

This phenomenon of fragmentation was precipitated by the existence of secret working groups within the Order itself, an existence desired by Mathers as early as 1897 for the purpose of deepening the knowledge acquired.

 

Florence Farr had thus founded a group called “La Sphère”. Enter William Butler Yeats, (1865-1939) Irish, future Nobel Prize for Literature in 1923. After having been leader of Isis-Urania, he left the Order in 1901, the same year as the trial of Théo Horos. and his wife for fraud and sexual offenses, trials where the name and practices of the Golden Dawn were called into question with the distorting amplification that you can guess, and above all the publication of pieces of Ritual of the Neophyte where the oath pronounced by the recipient was considered blasphemy.he demoralizing effect on the followers of the Outer Order accentuated the ravages of the war of leaders... In 1902, the Second Order gave itself a triumvirate to lead it: PW Bullock, quickly replaced by Doctor RW Felkin; MW Blackden, Egyptologist, and JW Brodie-Inner.

 

The Breaking of the Golden Dawn

 

They had to fight from the start against Arthur Edward Waite, who, at the head of a group of followers, wanted to modify the system of leadership, for reasons he explained in 1903: to be caliph instead of the caliph, then make The Order give up all magic, overhaul all rituals, and all for good reason: Waite claims the Third Order doesn't exist.

 

Waite and Blackden then founded their own Order, with a temple they named Isis-Urania after the first temple of the Golden Dawn. Brodie-Inner makes his Edinburgh temple independent.

 

Felkin reacts with a magical act: he abolishes the name "Golden Dawn" and gives it the name "Stella Matutina". It is this branch that is the legal (and spiritual?) successor to the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. It is under this name that Dion Fortune or Israel Regardie will know the Order. We are in 1903. The history of the Order is over: begins that of its heirs.The Continuators

 

The Golden Dawn had almost as many successors as the Martinist order of Papus, while having the original branch that survives alongside its imitators.

 

Crowley

 

One of the most famous followers of the spirit of GD is of course Crowley. After founding his Order, Astrum Argentinum, he received the patents of the Ordo Templis Orientiis during one of his many trips to the Orient - from where he also brought back yogas.

 

One of the fundamental designs of the OTO represents an oval containing an Egyptian-style eye at the top, in the middle a beaked dove at the bottom, and at the bottom a Flaming Cup stamped with the Templar cross. He had frequent contact with Rudolf Steiner, who found himself imbued with Golden Dawn for many of his afterlife theories.

  

==ISA Headquarters==

 

The Misfits were crating up their weapons and gadgets, preparing to move out; Gar had made some calls, with Needham, Jenna and Gaige agreeing to rendezvous at Butchinsky's. Unfazed by Zoom's attack, Ito presented Sharpe with a long parcel, offering him a pleasant "Merry Christmas, Montgomery." Unwrapping it, Sharpe was delighted to find a golden sceptre, its' tip finished with a golden dragon's head. "Expecto Patronum!" he chortled excitedly, waving it above his head, only for a cloud of fire to burst forth from the dragon's metal jaws.

 

"Perhaps you should hone your skills, first," Ito spoke politely, if not a little disappointedly.

 

Preparing to transfer his files, Kuttler's monitor whirred into life, as an encrypted file filled the screen, emblazoned with a large bat-logo.

 

"What on Earth?" he pondered aloud, as he began the long encryption process. Whether Kuttler had realised it or not, though unconscious and incapacitated, The Batman had just given the Misfits a fighting chance.

 

==Arkham Asylum==

 

Hour One

 

Drury was lying face up on a grotty, bloodstained mattress, watching the large ceiling fan above him churn slowly. He was in his old cell; Billings' book was placed by the pillow, its' cover obscured by a thin layer of dust; one of Hopper's empty beer bottles was rolling around on the ground and the air was warm and stale as though he'd never left its' confining concrete walls. For a brief moment, he felt like he hadn't, that he'd been thrown back in time; that Miranda was still alive, waiting for him to come home and that all he had to do, was run. An impossibility of course, and soon his jumbled thoughts and hopeless aspirations were shattered by the high pitched tones of the Pointer Sisters' 'I'm So Excited' blasting in his ears, dragging him back to reality: Joker was standing against the bars, lip syncing, as he held a boom box over his head in a perverse homage to 'Say Anything.'

 

"Good mourning, buttercup," he cooed with a sickeningly sweet smile, blowing Drury a kiss through the metal bars.

 

Drury turned over. If this was to be his life now, then he'd rather drift off into the lands of wandering consciousness and bittersweet fantasies. But part of him knew it wouldn't be that easy: The edges of Joker's red lips turned downwards in glum disapproval, as he lowered the boom box, then kicked it as though blaming it for his own shortcomings. He stuck an pair of un-gloved fingers in his mouth, and whistled. On command, and coming seemingly out of nowhere, Zoom blew an air horn into Drury's ear.

 

Startled, Drury fell off the bed, taking the bedsheet with him; emerging from the white mass of blanket and pillow, he grabbed the closest object he could find, missing the more tactically sound glass bottle, and instead pointing Billings' book at Zoom like a particularly egotistical weapon.

 

"That's it, Drury! Throw the book at him!" Joker called through the bars.

 

But before Drury could do anything, book related or otherwise, Zoom had tugged on the bedsheet he was standing on, and Drury toppled back, slamming his back against the bars of his cell.

 

"Why me?" Drury wheezed breathlessly, as he found himself asking that same question for the second time in as many days.

 

"Why not?" Joker repeated, gleefully evasive.

 

"No, this time I want an answer: I'm serious," Drury swore, standing up to face Joker. Unfazed, Joker stuck his hand through the bars and booped him on the nose.

 

"Ahh! And that's your first mistake!" he teased. "Stone-faced intimidation really isn't in your wheelhouse. You lack the jawline to carry it off!"

 

Taken aback, Drury felt his jaw, surprisingly hurt by the clown's comment, but pressed on. "You want a Batman rebound? We're a dime a dozen. Get Prometheus, get March, get that owl guy from that phony Justice League. Or Wrath, why not use Wrath?"

 

Caldwell, of course, was dead. Crushed by a whale carcass if Gaige's confession held any truth (it probably didn't). But his predecessor had resurfaced during the Society's first assault on Gotham and was surprisingly virile. For a man who was also presumed dead.

 

"Oh, he's lovely," Joker's eyes twinkled. "Pointy-headed, gravelly-voiced, actually pretty liberal... But here's the thing. He might shoot me. Actually shoot me! Click. Boom. Roll credits. And I can't die to Wrath!" he giggled, amused by his hypothetical death at the hands of the pioneer behind the 'Wratharang.'

 

"I might kill you," Drury interrupted.

 

Joker paused for a moment; his eyes locked on Drury as though there was something about him he couldn't quite figure out. "Well... You haven't yet," he refuted. "But the day's just getting started... plenty of time."

 

'Annoyingly cryptic. Figures,' Drury thought to himself. "And you? What are you meant to get out of this?" he interrogated Zoom.

 

Zoom, folded his arms and cocked his head to one side. "Thejokeeeeeer is notorious. Infaaaaaaaaamous. Hemakesbatman better. Bykilling. Bycrippling. By laaaaaaaaauuuuuuuughing. He willmake youbettertoo," he stated with his usual, muddled enunciation. "Youhadaspirations once. To beeeeeeee the Batmaaaaaaan's opposite nuuuuuuumber. Hisrival. Hisreverse. You haaaaaaave that chance now. Andwewillbe yooouuuuur teachers.

You haaaaaaaave twochoices now. Two paaaaaaaaaaths. You caneitherbehis equaaaaaal. Oryoucan supplaaaaaaaaant him."

 

"And remember, it all starts with a smile!" Joker lips parted, as he continued his serenade, this time without the aid of a boombox. "We shouldn't even think about tomorrow. Sweet memories will last a long, long time. We'll have a good time, baby, don't you worry. And if we're still playin' around, boy, that's just fine."

 

Drury stared back at him blankly. Joker, rested his hands on his hips in mock resignation: "So I'm no Sinatra. But someone threw the Music Meister off a balcony, so whose fault is that? For future reference, when someone says "Kill the music," they don't mean feed the conductor to a crocodile!"

 

Drury didn't respond.

 

"Hmph. Get some sleep while ya can, Pumpkin, you've got a looooong day ahead!"

 

Hour Three

 

Drury's quiet solitude was interrupted by a faint blue glow and a robotic clicking from outside; he rubbed his tired eyes and looked up; The metal door had receded into the wall, the action accompanied by a mechanic whirring. It was a trap, of course. Another game.

 

But if he didn't play along, what then? Would Zoom come for his family? For The Misfits? Could he take that chance?

 

The answer, of course, was no. Drury rose from the mattress, and stuck his head around the corner. On first glance, the coast was clear; but with a speedster on patrol, that could change in an instant.

 

Drury walked down the hallway, following a path laid out for him made up of gingerbread crumbs. 'Breadcrumbs, cute...' he rolled his eyes; among other things, he was particularly irritated that the soles of his orange crocs were now marred by crushed bits of biscuit. The trail, led him into the Recreation Centre; a room built for the more docile inmates; filled with toys, books and a film projector and decorated with a large rainbow painted across the pastel blue walls. At the end of the room, Joker was perched on a red space hopper, flanked by Zolomon on his left and to his right, a man in a black tuxedo and a flowing red cape, a large camera mounted on his head. Two more silhouettes were just barely visible behind the thick layers of glass behind them, but Drury still recognised Crane's tall witch's hat, and Billings' inebriated swaying. The door slammed shut behind him, with The King of Cats and Hayden taking their places on either side of the entrance. If Krill was there, they'd have a full house.

 

'Where was Krill?' Drury pondered for a brief moment before returning to the matter at hand.

 

The tuxedoed man, was the first to greet their guest of honour. "Hello, Drury. You might not remember me. My name is Harry. But you can call me Mr Camera," he reintroduced himself, offering him his hand.

 

"I remember," Drury spat back. "You carved up Ten like a fucking animal! Left him to bleed out in the middle of a goddamn riot!" He was on edge now, surrounded by psychopaths; some with grudges, some with agendas; half, he was certain, would kill him just for fun.

 

"Well, we are animals, Drury," Sims countered. "All of us. That's why they cage us... Sedate us. Hunt us. But their mistake has always been to treat us like prey."

 

As he spoke, the walls started to change; distort; revealing the room's true condition; Drury stepped back, eyes widening, as the painted walls became cracked and chipped, as the tiled floors gave way to unveil pools of dried blood. As rows of Polaroids blotted out the now-faded rainbow mural.

 

He looked at Sims, then at Joker, his face gaunt.

 

"Like what I've done with the place?" Joker teased.

 

Drury cautiously stepped towards the photos along the wall, and his mouth went dry. Some, he recognised; wedding photos, birthday parties... picnics in Robinson Parks... And then some, he didn't; those were newer; close up, personal pictures in dust filled rooms... But they all led him to one, horrifying conclusion:

 

"YOU LET THIS BASTARD INTO MY HOME? MY CHILDREN'S HOME?" he stormed forward, with a rage unfamiliar to Joker, but one he was enjoying immensely.

 

"Now, Drury. I could have sent Karlie," he teased, wagging a finger in Drury's face. "Talk about a White Christmas!"

 

"Actually, let's strike that one from the record, shall we? Not my finest jape."

 

Behind him, Sims sniffled awkwardly, reaching into his black dinner jacket. "Oh, silly me," he feigned forgetfullness. "I forgot one."

 

He inhaled, and removed a battered, bloodied photograph out of his breast pocket. He threw it in the air, and Drury caught in with his dirt-encrusted fingers. His eyes widened. It was the photo. The photo he'd brought with him to Blackgate, the photo he had when he had nothing else, the photo he entrusted to Ten.

 

The photo that cost him his hands.

 

"That's better," Sims chuckled knowingly, with a casualness that made Drury's blood boil.

 

That was it.

 

The Outcasts could tear him apart and he wouldn't have cared. In that moment, Drury could only see red: His first punch knocked Sims to the ground, then he kept going; Sims fruitlessly tried fighting back; his camera flash activated in a vain attempt to distract Walker, but he fought through the pain and continued his onslaught.

 

On the sidelines, Zoom, made a disagreeable hissing noise; The King licked his lips, and Joker laughed. "Drury! It's impolite to hold grudges!" he chortled. "Ten can't! Well, he can't really hold anything, can he?"

 

The camera's lens fractured under Drury's rage filled fists; his hand went through the glass; the shards ripped his fist open, but he still persisted. Blood dripped down onto Sim’s pale face; his glass-like eyes widened in petrified fear. But before he could do anything worse, a yellow arm grabbed Drury's. At first, he thought it was Zoom's; the red lightning bolt pattern around his wrist matched, and no other living assailant could have grabbed him that fast.

 

'Living.'

 

Drury looked back, and for the first time in a while he was overcome by pure, overwhelming fear.

 

Billings dropped his hip flask. A single whisper of "impossible" escaped Crane's lips. Hayden, waved. And for a second, the Joker's smile faltered.

 

"You-? You can't be- You're-"

 

"Oh, but I can be," Eobard Thawne smiled, his eyes glowing a blood red. "Pay attention now, Drury. Class is in session."

 

"Ahem."

 

Thawne exhaled and turned his head slowly and purposefully: Joker had risen from the Space Hopper and was clearing his throat loudly and intrusively. "Right! Good work everyone! We've covered a lot of ground today! Physical Exercise, psychological torment, a touch of necromancy... Read chapter seven, strangle a couple of cats and we shall resume after lunch!"

 

He clapped his hands, and the next thing Drury knew, he was back in his cell, leaving the Outcasts alone with The Professor to decide their next course of action.

 

==Jeremiah Arkham's Office==

 

The room was organised like a Parent-Teacher conference; Joker, was sat in Arkham's chair, playing with the silver Newton's Cradle on the desk; Zoom, was sat across from him, with an expression that was uncharacteristically sheepish; his back slouched and his hands placed in his lap. Billings stood at the side beside Crane, shaking between sips from his flask. At last, Thawne entered, bringing with him a trail of red lightning.

 

"Professor Thawne," Crane drawled, moving in to intercept him.

 

"Doctor Crane," Thawne smiled condescendingly, looking down at the once-proud Scarecrow. "I recall you were taller, once."

 

"I don't understand.... Where... Where's Krill?" Billings stammered, scratching his dandruff-ridden scalp. Then he looked down, his eyes drawn to a familiar red belt wrapped around Thawne's waist like a trophy. Thawne didn't have to say a thing: the implication was clear.

 

"R-right..." Billings paused, choosing his next words with caution. "Good call. The right call. Good riddance to bad rubbish and all that, eh? Man was entirely unprofessional!" he added, a tad unconvincingly.

 

Thawne smiled back, but there was no warmth behind his crimson gaze: "Perhaps. But at least he knew when to hold his tongue. I hear you're something of a celebrity these days, Mr Billings."

 

Billings gulped. His book 'Heroes or Villains' contained a less than flattering portrayal of his former allies in the Society, Thawne included, and although he had assumed his illusion tech made him indispensable, he had thought the same thing about Krill's portals.

 

The exchange no longer holding his interest, Thawne shot off again; in an instant, he was sat beside his protégé and sipping coffee from Joker's mug. "Shall we begin?" he asked presumptuously.

 

Joker grinned back, but there was an intensity behind his eyes. Above all else, he despised being upstaged. "I admit, Bardy, I'm a little disappointed in you! We had such grand designs for Abner and for you to unceremoniously krill him without consulting me- Well, it wounds me! Considering all our history-!"

 

Thawne raised his index finger. "We don't have history, clown. You, Crane and the screensaver formerly known as Signalman voted to annihilate my future. Yes, Cobb, I did see you bouncing around Joker's monitor. I'm not impressed, DeVoe mastered that little trick decades ago."

 

Phillip Cobb materialised as a rather disgruntled red and yellow hologram, waiting in deference to Joker.

 

"Well, it was everyone's future," Joker's nose wrinkled. "No need to make it personal."

 

Hour Five

 

The cell door opened a final time. Drury looked up; Joker was in the doorway, holding a large, wrapped parcel in his arms; he placed it on the floor and slid it across the ground over to him.

 

"Put it on."

 

Hesitantly, Drury opened it: It was his Moth costume, well, one of them; it was a stripped-down approximation of the one Twag stole from his Cave. Within the box was a neatly-folded assortment of clothing consisting of a deep purple bodysuit, a pair of striped purple and lavender tights, boots, gloves, a black belt and a metallic, bug-like helmet with glass lenses.

 

"I won't peek!" Joker swore, putting his hand over his eyes.

 

Drury was lost in thought for a moment, simply staring into the eyes of his bluish grey helmet, reflecting on the pain Killer Moth had inflicted on himself and others. And when it came time to suit up once more, he refused.

 

It didn't matter.

 

What little control he thought he had was ripped away from him faster than he could blink. In a flash, he was back in the familiar purple bodysuit and striped tights; his orange jumpsuit lay at Zoom's feet. And he suspected the night's humiliations, its' violations, were just beginning. 'The utility belt was empty, of course they'd have checked...' he sighed, checking his pouches for anything he might be able to use.

 

He stepped forward, squirming as Joker planted a kiss on his cheek "For luck," and shuddering as he clapped his bony hand against his buttocks to further 'motivate' him.

 

As Drury walked down the hallway, his stomach lurched; Billings, The King of Cats, Hayden and Sims were all stationed along the hall, positioned like a perverse wedding procession. As he passed them, they took turns tossing clumps of confetti at his head. He kept his head down, avoiding eye contact, until he at last reached his destination, a dingy cell in the low security wing of the penitentiary. He paused as he noticed a rusted plaque above the doorway:

 

"126959

TED CARSON,

ALIAS FIREFLY II"

 

He took a deep breath, and entered the room, the door locking behind him.

 

"Hello, Drury," a voice called out from behind him.

 

Thawne's.

 

Drury's mind started to race; just like that the 'wedding' procession was recontextualized: It was a funeral. His funeral. And just like everything else in this damn Asylum, it had been backwards and twisted. 'This was it,' he was certain. His death. He breathed in, and at last turned around, his eyes drawn to Thawne's belt. Krill's belt.

 

Thawne's eyes crinkled slightly, a thin smile across his face. "You want to escape? Take the belt," he spoke with a concerning casualness.

 

Drury said nothing.

 

"You can go anywhere. Be free."

 

No, it couldn't be that easy. Could it?

 

"You'd find me," Drury shook his head.

 

"True," Thawne admitted. "But a little time is better than no time, isn't it?"

 

"Take the belt."

 

"Take the belt and it all ends."

 

Channelling all his rage and desperation, Drury swiped at Thawne; the Professor evaded, of course. And before Drury could muster a defence, Thawne was on him, slapping him across the face. Drury stumbled back, his lip split.

 

"Take the belt," Thawne repeated.

 

Drury tried again. And again, only ever managing to injure himself. And with every failed attempt, Thawne hit back.

 

"Take the belt," Thawne demanded once more.

 

Drury lunged; Thawne caught his fist, effortlessly, and hurled him over his shoulder.

 

"Take the belt."

 

Drury charged forth; Thawne stuck his arm in his path, clotheslining him.

 

Drury fell to his knees, his blood coating the slabs below. "I'm going to kill you," he wheezed.

 

"You'll have to catch me first. Take the belt."

 

Another blind lunge. Another miss.

 

"Tsk tsk. Still too slow. Maybe if you were faster, your wife would still be alive..."

 

"Aaaaaaaaarrrrrr-"

 

All Thawne had to do was step aside, let Drury hit the wall. He struck the brick and it felt like his head had split open; Drury landed on the floor, his eyes drooped shut, and as he drifted into unconsciousness, he hoped that everything he knew would be different when he awoke.

 

For Sale at Sotheby's Contemporary Art Sale

 

George Condo is a contemporary American painter best known for his signature brand of figuration featuring fractured faces, bold lines, and aggressive imagery. Condo often recontextualizes paintings from the Old Masters, blending their imagery and techniques with Modern and contemporary aesthetics that echo Pablo Picasso and Willem de Kooning. “I describe what I do as psychological Cubism,” the artist has explained of his aesthetic. Born in 1957, the Concord, NH native moved to New York because his friend Jean-Michel Basquiat had persuaded him in the late 1970s. After a brief stretch working in Andy Warhol’s Factory, Condo decamped to Paris, France in 1985 for 10 years before returning to New York where he currently lives and works. The painter’s lasting influence can be seen in the work of a range of contemporary painters that includes John Currin, Glenn Brown, and Lisa Yuskavage. Copied from ArtNet.

The granite eagle on a mountain ridge was a symbol that Belgian Surrealist artist Rene Magritte used in many of his paintings. In "The Enchanted Domain" Magritte combined ideas from his earlier paintings by lifting and recontextualizing iconography from stand-alone compositions. He had devised an inventive progression of backdrops....cloud-filled skies, rich red drapery, the granite eagle on a mountain and other geometric patterns....that functioned like a theater set, allowing the "actors: onstage to coexist synchronously across discrete scenes.

 

The 'Enchanted Domain, IX' was one of a series of paintings that served as models for his final commission....a 233-foot-mural that took a team of painters more than five weeks to complete.

 

This original painting by Magritte was seen and photographed on display at San Francisco's Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) in an exhibit entitled 'Rene Magritte: The Fifth Season'.

Minolta AF-C, Kodak Gold 200

Prelinger Library

301 8th Street (corner of Folsom Street), Room 215

San Francisco, CA

 

I spent some time yesterday afternoon visiting the Prelinger Library over on 8th Street in San Francisco and have to say I was super impressed. The privately owned library was started and is now maintained by Rick Prelinger and Megan Shaw Prelinger who open it up to the public every Wednesday afternoon from 1-8pm for Fall of 2009 (and some Sundays). The library is also sometimes available via appointment if someone is coming in from out of town or can't make another time. The Prelingers are very cool and welcoming and made me feel very much at home on my visit.

 

I'd never heard about the library before and had found out about it when I saw a photo of this fantastic "free speech" neon sign that they have hanging in it on Flickr. I wanted to shoot the sign to add it to my neon signs collection and then learned a bit more about the library from their website and decided to visit.

 

Philosophically the the library is right up my alley. Not only do they allow you to bring in your digital camera and take photos of the pages of their books (which include some really cool graphically rich material), they actually encourage it, publicly identifying themselves as an appropriation-friendly place. The community spirit there is also engaging -- it's a very comfortable place to hang out, browse, chat, and explore.

 

Rick and Megan operate the library mostly by selling licenses through Getty images for some of their content and through other outside jobs and freelance work. They've designed the library to be a causal comfortable fear-free place where discovery through browsing is encouraged. The books and other material aren't loaned out like other libraries, rather If you find something that you like and want to use for your art or for other reasons you can simply photograph it with your digital camera or scan it there using one of their scanners.

 

I asked Rick about the copyright issues surrounding their policies and he told me that many of their works are out of copyright or are orphan works, but even where they are not, that the type of appropriation that goes on there would largely be considered fair use. People aren't really copying entire books to recreate them and sell them, rather people are using the material in the books to create new works of art or for other projects.

 

From the Prelinger Library's website:

 

"Most important of all, people wishing to copy library holdings for research and transformative use often face difficulties in making legitimate copies. Since the act of quoting and recontextualizing existing words and images is indistinguishable from making new ones, we think it's important for libraries to build appropriation-friendly access into their charters, and we're trying to take a big first step in this direction.

 

We are interested in exploring how libraries with specialized, unique, and arcane collections such as ours can exist and flourish outside protected academic environments and be made available to people working outside of those environments, especially artists, activists and independent scholars. "

 

Rick and Megan told me that they get about 1,000 visitors a year who visit the library. They have a guest book that you can sign there when you visit.

 

In association with the Internet Archive, the Prelinger Library has also digitized a number of the publications in their collection. You can browse those here.

 

I spent some time looking through some old magazine collections on advertising as well as some old photography magazines from the 1920s. There are some great images in these publications and I'm looking forward to many future visits to photograph more of this imagery and include it in my own collection of photographs.

 

There have been other write ups on the Prelinger Library and I was a bit embarrassed that the first time I'd heard of them was when I saw the neon sign that hangs in their space. I try to keep my ear to the ground, so to speak, for cool places worth exploring in the Bay Area, but alas, now I've discovered them and am sure that I'll be back for many additional visits in the future. It really makes you feel good about people when you see folks like the Prelingers so generously make such a fantastic resource available and free for the community.

 

If you haven't checked out the library yet, definitely plan a visit. The stacks of books are a wonderful place to get lost in and a great place to hang out. I put together a small photo set of images from the library here. Thanks again to Rick and Megan for making me feel so comfortable on my visit there yesterday.

This exuberant mural by Os Gêmeos bursts off the brick wall with the dynamic energy of a 1980s block party. Captured in New York City and now exhibited photographically at the Hirshhorn Museum, the work showcases the signature yellow-skinned characters of the Brazilian street art duo, whose real names are Otavio and Gustavo Pandolfo. Rendered with surreal proportions and animated postures, the figures convey both swagger and soul, embodying the essence of street culture across time and continents.

 

Each character in this scene feels like a personality plucked from a dance floor or subway car—one wears a “Frosty Freeze” cap in homage to the legendary breakdancer, another cradles a towering boombox, and all four groove with exaggerated limbs and flashy fits. Their elongated limbs, mismatched sneakers, and patterned clothing burst with storytelling detail. Os Gêmeos, deeply influenced by hip-hop and São Paulo’s vibrant graffiti scene, translate that rhythm into brushstrokes and spray paint, layering their pieces with cultural memory and a touch of magical realism.

 

Installed at street level in the heart of Manhattan, this mural was not simply painted—it was performed. Like many Os Gêmeos works, it was created in public view, inviting everyday New Yorkers to pause, watch, and connect with their surroundings through art. Even when removed from its original location and recontextualized inside a gallery or museum, it retains that participatory energy. You feel like you could walk right into the party.

 

The mural’s photographic display within Revolutions: Art from the Hirshhorn Collection 1860–1960 serves as a bridge between eras, linking contemporary street art to historical revolutions in visual expression. Just as Impressionists broke away from academic painting and Dadaists disrupted norms with radical experimentation, Os Gêmeos push past the conventions of the white cube and challenge where art belongs—and who it’s for.

 

Bright, cheeky, and undeniably alive, this mural is more than a colorful wall: it’s a conversation. Between neighborhoods and nations, past and present, music and paint, Os Gêmeos use their twin telepathy to weave a visual rhythm that makes you stop, smile, and maybe even dance.

 

You’ll find works like this throughout their global portfolio—from the favelas of São Paulo to the walls of Berlin and Boston. But here, against a red-brick New York wall, their art pulses with a distinctly American bounce. It’s nostalgia wrapped in aerosol, memory painted in motion, a flash of joy with revolutionary undertones.

Artist Jenny Odell's "fountain" is a reimagining of Marcel Duchamp's 1917 "Fountain" in light of accounts that Duchamp did not create Fountain himself, but submitted it on behalf of a female friend (possibly Baroness Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven or Louise Norton). This version features a GoGirl™ female urination device, which allows a woman to urinate standing up, much as a man does at a urinal. It also features as a backdrop Series 1, No. 8 by Georgia O'Keeffe, a female contemporary of Mardsen Hartley, whose extremely masculine 1913 painting The Warriors provided the backdrop for Fountain when it was originally photographed by Alfred Stieglitz. Like Fountain, fountain recontextualizes an industrially-produced, gendered urination device that seems not to belong in the gallery. Unlike Fountain, this piece places the device into a context that recognizes the underplayed role of gender, even within a movement as liberatory as Dada.

 

PHOTO BY MYLEEN HOLLERO FOR SWISSNEXSF.

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

Julie Mehretu. (American, born Ethiopia, 1970). Empirical Construction, Istanbul. 2003. Ink and synthetic polymer paint on canvas, 10' x 15' (304.8 x 457.2 cm). Fund for the Twenty-First Century. © 2008 Julie Mehretu

   

Gallery label text

Multiplex: Directions in Art, 1970 to Now, November 21, 2007–July 28, 2008

 

For Mehretu, abstraction "allows for thinking of an issue from different perspectives, from many points of view." "I work with source material that I am interested in conceptually, politically, or even just visually," she has explained. "I pull from all of this material, project it, trace it, break it up, recontextualize it, layer one on the other, and envelop it into the DNA of the painting. It then becomes the context, the history, the point of departure. It becomes the place of the painting."

 

This doesn't translate well to a small picture. It's actually as big as a wall and quite stunning.

From the museum label:

 

Love, Queen, Adam Pendleton's (b. Richmond, Virginia, 1984; lives in Brooklyn, New York) first solo exhibition in Washington, DC, brings together recent works to highlight the centrality of painting, as well as the translation and transformation of the handmade mark, in his practice. Since he began making art in the early 2000s, Pendleton has developed an expansive approach to art-making that employs gesture, fragment, text, and image to recontextualize histories of painting, abstraction, Blackness, and the historical avant-garde. Deploying collage as model and method, Pendleton places traditionally separate ideas and processes in close proximity, creating a fluid state that opens up new spaces for seeing and thinking.

 

Love, Queen includes paintings from five bodies of work: Black Dada, Untitled (Days), WE ARE NOT, Composition, and Movement. Challenging convention through their blurring of distinctions among painting, photography, and drawing, Pendleton's visually active and spatially complex paintings give visual form to what the artist describes as the "complex real"—the onslaught of sensory phenomena and often contradictory information that defines contemporary experience.

 

His painting process begins on paper by exploring the full breadth of mark-making. He layers paint, spray paint, ink, and watercolor, integrating fragmentary text and geometric forms through stenciling techniques. These works on paper are photographed and then layered using a screen-printing process. The resulting paintings—simultaneously expressionistic, minimal, and conceptually rich—feature both stark contrasts and subtle variations in tone and finish. They are a tangible manifestation of his belief in painting as a powerful "visual and conceptual force."

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

The Lever House, 390 Park Avenue, NYC

 

by navema

www.navemastudios.com

 

For the Lever House installation, Sachs has created his first monumental works in bronze, presenting the familiar icons “Hello Kitty,” “My Melody” (both fictional characters produced by the Japanese company Sanrio in 1974), and the small rabbit, “Miffy” (created by Dutch artist Dick Bruna in 1955). Working from the original toys, Sachs and his assistants construct enlarged versions using sheets of lightweight foamcore and glue guns, which are then cast in bronze, and ironically painted white to resemble the white foamcore surface. “Hello Kitty” and “Miffy” also function as outdoor fountains.

   

“For me to do a model of “Hello Kitty”, which is this merchandising icon that exists only as a merchandising and licensed character. To then redo that in a “fine” material like bronze, I think is really to the point. It’s recontextualizing, shifting it back to a high level and making it really, really clear... We try to use materials that suggest the item’s usage, because we are in a world where everything is so perfect and seamlessly made that there’s no evidence of it’s construction, there’s no history. Most things are engineered to resist history. If my work is anything, it is against that theory. I try to show flaws because flaws are human. These details on how things are made show the politics behind how we consume our products... It is sculpture, because it’s talked about, sold, and shown as such. But to me it’s really bricolage, which is the French term for do-it-yourself repair. Bricolage comes from a culture that repairs rather than replaces – American culture just replaces.”

  

TOM SACHS is a sculptor, probably best known for his elaborate recreations of various Modern icons, all of them masterpieces of engineering and design of one kind or another. Born in New York City in 1966, Sachs grew up in Westport, Connecticut and attended Greens Farms Academy for high school. He attended Bennington College in Vermont. Following graduation, he studied architecture in London before deciding to return to the States and started making sculpture and other art objects.

 

In an early show he made Knoll office furniture out of phone books and duct tape; later, he recreated Le Corbusier's 1952 Unité d'Habitation using only foamcore and a glue gun. Other projects have included his versions of various Cold War masterpieces, like the Apollo 11 Lunar Excursion Module, and the bridge of the battleship USS Enterprise. And because no engineering project is more complex and pervasive than the corporate ecosystem, he's done versions of those, too, including a McDonald's he built using plywood, glue, assorted kitchen appliances.

 

In 1994, Sachs created a Christmas scene for the windows at Barneys New York entitled "Hello Kitty Nativity" where the Virgin Mary was replaced by Hello Kitty dressed in Chanel and Nike. This contemporary revision of the traditional nativity scene received great attention and demonstrated Sachs' interest in the phenomena of consumerism, branding, and the cultural fetishization of products. In 1997, with the perspective that all "products" are equal, Sachs created Allied Cultural Prosthetics - thereby giving his studio a formal name - and began to utilize logos and design elements from major fashion houses and other instantly recognizable brands in his work.

  

After several solo exhibitions in New York and abroad, Sachs showed his major installation "Nutsy's" at the Deutsche Guggenheim in 2003. According to one art critic who experienced the installation: "Like Grand Theft Auto, Tom Sachs' current installation for the Deutsche Guggenheim in Berlin offers a miniature likeness of a reality steeped in the laws of consumerist society. It comes as no surprise that Sachs, a video game enthusiast, ignores the boundaries between "high" and "low": without comment, modernist icons stand as equals next to the flagships of global consumerism and symbols of contemporary leisure culture. Just like in a computer game, visitors to the exhibition get a chance to relinquish the passive role ordinarily accorded to them and become actors in this gigantic bricolage by driving one of the racing cars through the installation."

 

In 2006, the artist had two major survey exhibitions mounted in Europe, first at the Astrup Fearnley Museet for Moderne Kunst and next at the Fondazione Prada, Milan. His work can be found in major museum collections worldwide, including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, the Whitney Museum of American Art and the Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris.

  

www.tomsachs.org

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

Hello World! or: How I Learned to Stop Listening and Love the Noise (2008) stitches more than 5000 video diaries gathered from MySpace, YouTube, and Facebook into a massive, panoramic crowd of individual talking heads. It is simultaneously a critical look at the growing cacophony of participatory media and an optimistic meditation on its democratizing potential.

 

Each video diary consists of a single speaker candidly addressing an imagined, potentially massive audience from a private space such as a bedroom, kitchen, or dorm room. The individual monologues are mundane–records of daily activities, opinions, feelings, and frustrations–but together they reveal a fascinating patchwork of life lived online.

 

Artist Christopher Baker, originally trained as a scientist, examines the complex relationship between society and its technologies by recontextualizing captured communications and visualizing large sets of data. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Art and Technology Studies department at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

Wednesday greetings, collectors! The Cold of Late Spring '09 still has Mr. Gutierrez and me in its grips, which is beginning to make both of us a little cranky. We've got stuff to do, and we want to suffer no impediments in getting it done. Raul's been busy rolling out all kinds of improvements for the site, modifying the home page to include more images of recent editions and updating the sidebar to include recent media mentions of our talented artists. We're already bumping up against some limitations there — with Alex MacLean, Jorge Colombo and Christian Chaize all worthy of the spots they've earned, we're wondering what we'll do when the next wave of attention hits. For more details check out my recent blog dispatch.

 

We're also prepping a big announcement, which will land in the inbox of Hey, Hot Shot! list subscribers tomorrow: this year's first 5 Hot Shots! Which means that a day of deliberation awaits me once I'm done introducing today's editions by a Fall 2006 Hot Shot, photographer Shen Wei.

 

It's both inconvenient and fitting that Shen's midair, en route to China, as I introduce his 20x200 debut. Both of his photographs, Blessing over the Rice Machine, Guiyang, Guizhou Province and Yi, Beijing, are from Chinese Sentiment. In this new series, he's attempting to reconnect to his memories of the homeland he left nearly a decade ago, with a fresh perspective that's influenced by his experiences and accomplishments abroad.

 

I've known Shen for a while now, and my evolving relationship with him is an excellent illustration of why Hey, Hot Shot! and the gallery are such fulfilling endeavors. The opportunity to work with artists as their careers are taking shape is an honor and a source of inspiration. (And sometimes it's even exasperating!) I watch careers progress with a combination of mama bear pride and curiosity, and I learn a lot from every single artist that I work with. My interactions with Shen have been particularly enriching. Coming as we do from entirely different cultures, I'm continuously fascinated — and often surprised — by how he approaches the world in his work.

 

Two summers ago, I co-curated an exhibition with Jörg Colberg called A New American Portrait, which included work by Shen. It remains one of my favorite exhibitions, not only because I so enjoyed exhibiting the work that we chose, but also because it gave me cause to consider deeply a genre that's been of abiding interest to me. Releasing Shen's editions has me thinking about it again, and I'm loving the challenge.

 

A while back, my friend Carolina caught me off-guard with a deceptively simple question. During a conversation about Stefan Ruiz and his amazing telenovelas project, she asked me to compare Stefan's portraiture to Alec Soth's. I started to talk right away, assuming it'd be a cinch to explain because I know both of them and their respective bodies of work pretty well, but I stumbled, and fast. It was hard and I was frustrated, impressed and challenged all at once. What I came around to was this, which I later wrote to Alec in an email:

 

... when comparing you to Stefan, I decided that your intent is different, and the differences in your intent affect your relationships with your subjects. When I look at your photos, I feel like they [the subjects] are revealing themselves to you, and that the viewer is an outsider who you're allowing to witness that relationship you've forged. With Stefan, I feel like he is persuading his subjects to show themselves to the viewer, and that he is the intermediary who facilitates it. It's hard for me to articulate why exactly, and I wonder how much of my hunch is based on knowing each one of you. I wish I could articulate certain empirical evidence in each of your photos to support the theory, but it's hard to do.

 

Which brings me back to Shen... his approach, and his results, are somewhere in between those two things. He once explained to me that he uses the fact that he's foreign to disarm people and/or make them feel more comfortable. His accent, his excellent-but-not-perfect-English, his entirely different cultural background — all these things could make him shy and insecure, but instead he uses them to his advantage, making people more comfortable with their own vulnerabilities.

 

Photographs resulting from this approach form his Almost Naked series. There's an intimacy to these images, often revealing an unguardedness which suggests to me that the subject is perhaps more at ease revealing themselves to a photographer who they see as being "other" — not part of their world, their community at all. I kind of wonder if that assumption extends to who they think his [Shen's] audience is.

 

That Shen's portraits are suffused with sexuality adds another important layer to the work, especially when you consider the cultural context Shen has emerged from. As he's mentioned in interviews, "Chinese people are much more conservative and isolated than Americans. Chinese people are living in a much stricter society; there are rules and rules that came out of thousands years of history."

 

These differences are central to Shen's work, and I think it's his enthusiasm about being freed from such conservatism that puts his subjects at ease. His fascination is accompanied by a certain amount of incredulous thrill over the fact that he can ask someone to pose nude and that they will. It's disarming to encounter someone so curious, so genuinely engaged and interested and not in the least bit jaded.

 

It's not the sensationalism or the taboo that draws him in, it's his appetite for freedom — his own and that of his subjects — which inspires him. With this new project, he is taking everything that he's learned and become through his time in the States and bringing back to his homeland, attempting to recontextualize it there. Both he and his country have changed considerably in the intervening years; what a treat it is to be able to witness the effects of these changes on both shooter and subject.

The upside-down car in the courtyard of the Kunstpalast in Düsseldorf is an art installation related to the exhibition of the artist Hans-Peter Feldmann.

 

A press release for the exhibition mentions that visitors are surprised by an "upside-down car in the courtyard" before entering the main exhibition.

 

Hans-Peter Feldmann's work is known for using everyday objects and questioning the boundaries between art and everyday life, so the unusual placement of a car is consistent with his artistic style and serves as a preview or thematic introduction to his retrospective.

 

The "Hans-Peter Feldmann. Art Exhibition" at the Kunstpalast Düsseldorf is a significant retrospective dedicated to the work of the influential German artist (1941–2023). Spanning his 60-year career, the exhibition is a comprehensive survey featuring around 80 works, including early photographs from the 1970s, sculptures made from everyday objects, painted-over paintings, and expansive installations. The presentation, which occupies ten rooms of the museum, is notable as the first major exhibition following Feldmann's death in May 2023, and it holds the special distinction of being the final museum show he was actively involved in planning, with the title itself coming directly from the artist.

 

Feldmann's oeuvre consistently revolves around fundamental questions: What is art? Where do its boundaries lie? The exhibition powerfully illustrates his rejection of the traditional distinction between "art" and "everyday life," showcasing how he elevated the seemingly banal and incidental to the realm of high art. Recurring themes throughout his work include social clichés, voyeurism, and consumerism, often approached with a direct, playful, and humorous sensibility. Key works on display highlight his artistic strategies of appropriation, alienation, and recontextualization, inviting viewers to re-examine familiar objects and images from a new perspective.

 

A central thread of the exhibition is Feldmann's profound fascination with visual imagery and the photographic medium. His artistic practice, which he described as a three-stage process of cutting out, collecting, and gluing, began with his archive of found photographs, postcards, and newspaper clippings. Notable works that embody this approach include his "Zeitserien" (Time Series), which document simple, everyday moments in sequence, and his collection of 156 international newspaper front pages from September 12, 2001, which collectively explore the impact of mass media and the power of image-text combinations in shaping public perception.

 

Beyond the formal presentation of works, the exhibition maintains Feldmann's desire to break with institutional conventions and engage a broad audience. It features interactive and participatory elements, such as his large installation "Schattenspiel" (Shadow Play, 2002), where shadows of rotating toys and found objects are fantastically distorted, and a "Feldmann Shelf" (or "Swap Shelf") where visitors can engage with his ethos of value and exchange. The retrospective ultimately celebrates Feldmann's enduring legacy as an artist who humorously and radically questioned the mechanisms of the art world and the formation of taste, proving the continuing relevance of his playful, anti-establishment spirit.

The upside-down car in the courtyard of the Kunstpalast in Düsseldorf is an art installation related to the exhibition of the artist Hans-Peter Feldmann.

 

A press release for the exhibition mentions that visitors are surprised by an "upside-down car in the courtyard" before entering the main exhibition.

 

Hans-Peter Feldmann's work is known for using everyday objects and questioning the boundaries between art and everyday life, so the unusual placement of a car is consistent with his artistic style and serves as a preview or thematic introduction to his retrospective.

 

The "Hans-Peter Feldmann. Art Exhibition" at the Kunstpalast Düsseldorf is a significant retrospective dedicated to the work of the influential German artist (1941–2023). Spanning his 60-year career, the exhibition is a comprehensive survey featuring around 80 works, including early photographs from the 1970s, sculptures made from everyday objects, painted-over paintings, and expansive installations. The presentation, which occupies ten rooms of the museum, is notable as the first major exhibition following Feldmann's death in May 2023, and it holds the special distinction of being the final museum show he was actively involved in planning, with the title itself coming directly from the artist.

 

Feldmann's oeuvre consistently revolves around fundamental questions: What is art? Where do its boundaries lie? The exhibition powerfully illustrates his rejection of the traditional distinction between "art" and "everyday life," showcasing how he elevated the seemingly banal and incidental to the realm of high art. Recurring themes throughout his work include social clichés, voyeurism, and consumerism, often approached with a direct, playful, and humorous sensibility. Key works on display highlight his artistic strategies of appropriation, alienation, and recontextualization, inviting viewers to re-examine familiar objects and images from a new perspective.

 

A central thread of the exhibition is Feldmann's profound fascination with visual imagery and the photographic medium. His artistic practice, which he described as a three-stage process of cutting out, collecting, and gluing, began with his archive of found photographs, postcards, and newspaper clippings. Notable works that embody this approach include his "Zeitserien" (Time Series), which document simple, everyday moments in sequence, and his collection of 156 international newspaper front pages from September 12, 2001, which collectively explore the impact of mass media and the power of image-text combinations in shaping public perception.

 

Beyond the formal presentation of works, the exhibition maintains Feldmann's desire to break with institutional conventions and engage a broad audience. It features interactive and participatory elements, such as his large installation "Schattenspiel" (Shadow Play, 2002), where shadows of rotating toys and found objects are fantastically distorted, and a "Feldmann Shelf" (or "Swap Shelf") where visitors can engage with his ethos of value and exchange. The retrospective ultimately celebrates Feldmann's enduring legacy as an artist who humorously and radically questioned the mechanisms of the art world and the formation of taste, proving the continuing relevance of his playful, anti-establishment spirit.

Recontextualizations from @JulianSchnabel 's Basquiat 4 the Amazing Director of Buffalo 66, @gallo_vincent #BigLove from #DetroitRockCity! #iphone #hipstamatic

Kathryn Andrews "Sunbathers I"

 

Nude sunbathing is not allowed on the High Line but nearly nude billboard advertising is.

The Lever House, 390 Park Avenue, NYC

 

by navema

www.navemastudios.com

 

For the Lever House installation, Sachs has created his first monumental works in bronze, presenting the familiar icons “Hello Kitty,” “My Melody” (both fictional characters produced by the Japanese company Sanrio in 1974), and the small rabbit, “Miffy” (created by Dutch artist Dick Bruna in 1955). Working from the original toys, Sachs and his assistants construct enlarged versions using sheets of lightweight foamcore and glue guns, which are then cast in bronze, and ironically painted white to resemble the white foamcore surface. “Hello Kitty” and “Miffy” also function as outdoor fountains.

   

“For me to do a model of “Hello Kitty”, which is this merchandising icon that exists only as a merchandising and licensed character. To then redo that in a “fine” material like bronze, I think is really to the point. It’s recontextualizing, shifting it back to a high level and making it really, really clear... We try to use materials that suggest the item’s usage, because we are in a world where everything is so perfect and seamlessly made that there’s no evidence of it’s construction, there’s no history. Most things are engineered to resist history. If my work is anything, it is against that theory. I try to show flaws because flaws are human. These details on how things are made show the politics behind how we consume our products... It is sculpture, because it’s talked about, sold, and shown as such. But to me it’s really bricolage, which is the French term for do-it-yourself repair. Bricolage comes from a culture that repairs rather than replaces – American culture just replaces.”

  

TOM SACHS is a sculptor, probably best known for his elaborate recreations of various Modern icons, all of them masterpieces of engineering and design of one kind or another. Born in New York City in 1966, Sachs grew up in Westport, Connecticut and attended Greens Farms Academy for high school. He attended Bennington College in Vermont. Following graduation, he studied architecture in London before deciding to return to the States and started making sculpture and other art objects.

 

In an early show he made Knoll office furniture out of phone books and duct tape; later, he recreated Le Corbusier's 1952 Unité d'Habitation using only foamcore and a glue gun. Other projects have included his versions of various Cold War masterpieces, like the Apollo 11 Lunar Excursion Module, and the bridge of the battleship USS Enterprise. And because no engineering project is more complex and pervasive than the corporate ecosystem, he's done versions of those, too, including a McDonald's he built using plywood, glue, assorted kitchen appliances.

 

In 1994, Sachs created a Christmas scene for the windows at Barneys New York entitled "Hello Kitty Nativity" where the Virgin Mary was replaced by Hello Kitty dressed in Chanel and Nike. This contemporary revision of the traditional nativity scene received great attention and demonstrated Sachs' interest in the phenomena of consumerism, branding, and the cultural fetishization of products. In 1997, with the perspective that all "products" are equal, Sachs created Allied Cultural Prosthetics - thereby giving his studio a formal name - and began to utilize logos and design elements from major fashion houses and other instantly recognizable brands in his work.

  

After several solo exhibitions in New York and abroad, Sachs showed his major installation "Nutsy's" at the Deutsche Guggenheim in 2003. According to one art critic who experienced the installation: "Like Grand Theft Auto, Tom Sachs' current installation for the Deutsche Guggenheim in Berlin offers a miniature likeness of a reality steeped in the laws of consumerist society. It comes as no surprise that Sachs, a video game enthusiast, ignores the boundaries between "high" and "low": without comment, modernist icons stand as equals next to the flagships of global consumerism and symbols of contemporary leisure culture. Just like in a computer game, visitors to the exhibition get a chance to relinquish the passive role ordinarily accorded to them and become actors in this gigantic bricolage by driving one of the racing cars through the installation."

 

In 2006, the artist had two major survey exhibitions mounted in Europe, first at the Astrup Fearnley Museet for Moderne Kunst and next at the Fondazione Prada, Milan. His work can be found in major museum collections worldwide, including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, the Whitney Museum of American Art and the Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris.

  

www.tomsachs.org

DECONSTRUCTING ROY LICHTENSTEIN

BEFORE AND AFTER

 

EDWARD D'ANCONA

Limbering Up

circa 1940's

 

ROY LICHTENSTEIN

Man With Chest Expander - 1961

 

It would seem that Lichtenstein was even less original than many of his existing detractors had thought.

 

Although Lichtenstein had been using comic book imagery in his paintings since 1957, he did not do large canvases reproducing single comic strip panels featuring speech balloons until he painted Look Mickey in the summer of 1961 - four months after he had, by his own admission, seen Warhol's canvases. Warhol had been painting single comic strip panels featuring speech balloons since 1960 - a year earlier than Lichtenstein. It is possible that Lichtenstein, as Warhol suspected, had seen Warhol's paintings at Bonwit Teller, although Lichtenstein never mentioned it in interviews. In any case, Lichtenstein admitted having seen Warhol's cartoon paintings prior to doing his own single panel comic strip paintings featuring speech balloons (Look Mickey).

 

www.warholstars.org/warhol1/11roylichtenstein.html

 

Edward D'Ancona was a prolific pin-up artist who produced hundreds of enjoyable images, almost nothing is known about his background. He sometimes signed his paintings with the name "D'Amarie", but his real name appears on numerous calendar prints published from the mid 1930s through the mid 1950s, and perhaps as late as 1960.

 

The first company to publish D'Ancona pin-ups, about 1935 to 1937, was Louis F. Dow in St Paul. D'Ancona worked in oil on canvas and his originals from that time usually measured about 30 x 22 inches. His early work is comparable in quality to that of the young Gil Elvgren, who had begun to work for Dow in 1937. Because D'Ancona produced so much work for Dow, one might assume that he was born in Minnesota and lived and worked in the St Paul, Minneapolis area. It is known that he supplied illustrations to the Goes Company in Cincinnati and to several soft-drink firms, which capitalized on his works similarity to the Sundblom/Elvgren style, which was so identified with Coca-Cola. During the 1940s and 1950s, D'Ancona's superb use of primary colors, masterful brushstrokes, and painterly style elevated him to the ranks of the very best artist in pin-up and glamour art. His subject matter at this time resembled Elvgren's. Both enjoyed painting nudes and both employed situation poses a great deal. D'Ancona also painted a fair amount of evening-gown scenes, as did Elvgren, Frahm, and Erbit.

 

By 1960, D'Ancona had moved into the calendar art field. Instead of doing pin-ups and glamour images, however, he specialized in pictures on the theme of safety in which wholesorne policemen helped children across the street in suburban settings that came straight out of Norrnan Rockwell.

 

Arlen Schumer

These comparisons are absolutely ridiculous; SO WHAT if RL was inspired by those inconsequential pieces of commercial (found) art! RL recontextualized them into ART! When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads out of 1965 sand and wake up and smell the 21st century? Where you've all LOST that argument?!?!?

 

Darryl Alexander Moore

I LOVE Lichtenstein! As an art teacher, I just finished doing art assignments based on his works just last week.

 

Arlen Schumer

Darryl--invite me come to your class and do a Lichtenstein lecture! www.arlenschumer.com/visualectures

 

Mike Hall

I've never researched the matter enough to understand the Lichtenstein hatred. Yes, he appropriated some some comic book images...which he then re-purposed (with alterations!) into commentaries on an entire STYLE of pop art. What exactly is wrong with that? It's not much different than mixed media art which uses photos and found objects to say something entirely different than what was originally said by the photos and found objects!

 

Arlen Schumer

OY VEY, Mike, just scroll thru my own wall for past threads re: RL that expose the absolute virulence with which they hate RL; in fact, here's one of my own recent ri postes to their deadly combination of ignorance (they're still stuck in '65, with the same tired criticisms of tracing/stealing that you & i both thought were left behind) and arrogance (because they're comic book art fans, they think they know what they're talking about): "For the umpteenth time, if all you (and most other "comic fans" like you too, Fester?) think RL did was simply trace a comic book panel (and Mort, I'm surprised that you, an accomplished pro, would know there are worlds of difference between simply tracing an image vs. creating an entirely new work based on that reference, be it photo or illo), wake up and smell 2012--it ain't 1963 anymore, when middlebrow art critics said the same thing you're still harping on! RL proved them and you all wrong with the depth and breadth of his work over the years. If you invalidate RL, you invalidate ALL of Pop Art, not to mention the arts of sampling, appropriation and found art. Good luck with all that! Me, I will still be admiring RL's work as the great graphic designer he was, recontextualizing comic art and other commercial art into paintings that have stood the test of time--while your lame, stale canards and cavils are as dated and passe as they are pointless."

 

Mike Hall

It's ridiculous. Of course, these same people probably have NO IDEA how much fine art AND comic art rely on photo reference, or how widespread use of the camera obscura was in the arts before photography. As for RL, it takes a trained eye maybe 3 seconds to see the differences between what RL did and the panels he borrowed from; the differences are almost immediately apparent, and his intent is pretty clear.

 

Arlen Schumer

So then, Mike, explain why SO many professional (comic) artists--who, like I indicated in my previous post, SHOULD KNOW BETTER--are STILL wallowing in their own arrogant ignorance re: RL?

 

Mike Hall

Like I said, I have no idea. Lack of formal art education/reading on the subject? Hyper-sensitivity to the concept of sampling and how it can/should be used in art? Parroting sentiments expressed by others? It's a mystery to me. :)

 

Arlen Schumer

All of the above!

 

Coby L Cyr

wow...those two images look SO much alike! (sarcasm intended) He turned the idea into a beautiful piece. I do this a lot in my art work...I guess I'm a unimaginative wannabe illustrator also...wait...I do many more pieces that are original also, but I guess people will get stuck on reference pieces *sigh*

 

Arlen Schumer

Eggs Ackley, Coby!

 

Rick Stromoski

And James Frey was an excellent author!

 

Arlen Schumer

care to elaborate, rick? :) the 2 are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!

 

Arlen Schumer

Mike Hall, Rick Stromoski is EXACTLY the artist we've been discussing! :)

 

Rick Stromoski

And Shepard Fairey is an amazingly original poster artist!

 

Arlen Schumer

stick to the subject, rick! or CAN you?

 

Rick Stromoski

Sorry I prefer to wallow in my arrogant ignorance

 

Arlen Schumer

if the shoe fits, rick, wear it!

 

David Edward Martin

Lichenstein is a plagiarist. Period.

If he had acknowledged the artists whose works he copied, it would not have been so bad.

If he had given those artists a share of the millions he made copying their work, it would have been great.

But in the end, he was just a plagiarist and a fraud.

 

Coby L Cyr

Hmmm, actually, if this following link is correct....that is pretty bad. I was commenting on the images posted in the original link here. This link I found IS pretty extreme and far beyond "referencing" =/ You have to agree a little bit on this Arlen...

davidbarsalou.homestead.com/LICHTENSTEINPROJECT.html

 

Robert Pincombe

We've come far enough in this discussion for me to say only that the particular works for which Lichtenstein is most renowned are his least artistic works with little context from him and no imagination. Forget arguing plagiarism. All artists take from the world and arts around them. So I won't worry about the whole, who's panel is in this painting and just say, his brilliance was in selling his least interesting works as his greatest. Christ, the whole Lichtenstein debates of the last thirty years are the true artistic achievement. Just as Andy Warhol was his own greatest creation, so too is Lichtenstein himself his greatest piece of work.

 

Coby L Cyr

And that's why I come here...to get some education and insight into others views. Love it

 

Pete Harrison

Roy transformed clip art into something to be hung on a wall. Given the decade, it worked and was original & refreshing; the use of benday dots on canvas was pretty clever. HOWEVER, I do appreciate David's research that lets us all know the artist that originally did the artwork.

 

Arlen Schumer shared a link.

These comparisons are absolutely ridiculous; SO WHAT if Roy Lichtenstein was inspired by these inconsequential pieces of commercial (found) art! RL recontextualized them into ART! When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads...See More

 

Deconstructing roy lichtenstein - before and after

www.flickr.com

DECONSTRUCTING ROY LICHTENSTEIN BEFORE AND AFTER EDWARD D'ANCONA Limbering Up circa 1940's ROY LICHTENSTEIN Man Exercising 1961 It would seem that Lichtenstein was even less original than many of his existing detractors had thought. Although Lichtenstein had been using comic book imagery in hi...

Mark Staff Brandl and 6 others like this.

 

Mike Hall

I've never researched the matter enough to understand the Lichtenstein hatred. Yes, he appropriated some some comic book images...which he then re-purposed (with alterations!) into commentaries on an entire STYLE of pop art. What exactly is wrong with that? It's not much different than mixed media art which uses photos and found objects to say something entirely different than what was originally said by the photos and found objects!

 

Arlen Schumer OY VEY, Mike, just scroll thru my own wall for past threads re: RL that expose the absolute virulence with which they hate RL; in fact, here's one of my own recent ripostes to their deadly combination of ignorance (they're still stuck in '65, with the same tired criticisms of tracing/stealing that you & i both thought were left behind) and arrogance (because they're comic book art fans, they think they know what they're talking about): "For the umpteenth time, if all you (and most other "comic fans" like you too, Fester?) think RL did was simply trace a comic book panel (and Mort, I'm surprised that you, an accomplished pro, would know there are worlds of difference between simply tracing an image vs. creating an entirely new work based on that reference, be it photo or illo), wake up and smell 2012--it ain't 1963 anymore, when middlebrow art critics said the same thing you're still harping on! RL proved them and you all wrong with the depth and breadth of his work over the years. If you invalidate RL, you invalidate ALL of Pop Art, not to mention the arts of sampling, appropriation and found art. Good luck with all that! Me, I will still be admiring RL's work as the great graphic designer he was, recontextualizing comic art and other commercial art into paintings that have stood the test of time--while your lame, stale canards and cavils are as dated and passe as they are pointless."

 

Mike Hall

It's ridiculous. Of course, these same people probably have NO IDEA how much fine art AND comic art rely on photo reference, or how widespread use of the camera obscura was in the arts before photography. As for RL, it takes a trained eye maybe 3 seconds to see the differences between what RL did and the panels he borrowed from; the differences are almost immediately apparent, and his intent is pretty clear.

 

Shelly Crowley

Good Morning Arlen you wicked Man! :)

 

Arlen Schumer

Sorry you're so "hurt," Rick--when 1. I started this friggin' thread; 2. I started out being GENERAL in my criticisms of RL haters; and 3. you joined the thread voluntarily and posted your predictable RL attacks--so what, i don't have the "right" to spar with you verbally (especially someone I've known over the years and spent many dinners together with)? And then you complain that you're being "personally insulted"? Jeez, Rick, how thin IS your skin?

 

Arlen Schumer

Can't take the "heat" of debate, then don't come in the kitchen, rick!

 

Arlen Schumer

Hey shelly--you've come right in the middle of some anti-sensitivity counseling! :)

 

Shelly Crowley I

see that .....Still Love you my Witty Friend!

 

Arlen Schumer

Wow, rick, for someone who works in "funny" comics, you certainly have NO sense of humor! What the hell do I have to do, put a smiley-face icon after phrases like "turn in your artist badge" and "Captain Facetious"?!?!? And every other quote of mine you've pulled to justify your "hurt" feelings? Grown the eff up, man!

 

Arlen Schumer

Shelly--at least SOMEONE gets my "wittiness"!!! Where have you been all my life?

 

Arlen Schumer

And Rick, calling your argument "facetious" is a "personal attack" in your eyes? wow...rick, I called your ARGUMENT facetious, not YOU! Man, you're something!

 

Shelly Crowley

Hiding in a tiny cabin deep in a forest ...Snicker*

 

Steve Elworth

Are people going to start attacking Andy Warhol next? RL attacks have gone from arracking him from taking comics too seriously to ripping off these great artists pf comics? Enough!!!

 

Rick Stromoski

And Rick, calling your argument "facetious" is a "personal attack" in your eyes?

Not so much a personal attack ...more like dismissive. If you;re going to declare something facetious you need to explain why. Otherwise it's arguing by fiat/

 

Arlen Schumer

Now I ned to explain to you what the word facetious means in regards to how & why I used it? Well, gee, Rick, you attempted to "dismiss" RL's work by choosing a Mondrian and then creating an exact duplicate of it, only with the colors slightly changed; the dictionary def of "facetious" is: "treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor; flippant." Sorry, but if you couldn't figure that out for yourself, that's your problem--it's not my "job" to explain every step of a debate/discussion/argument to you--it's YOUR job to figure that out.

 

Fester Faceplant

I'm going to copy all of Bruce Springsteen's songs , just re-record them slightly, and call them my own. I'll make millions of dollars and people will call me brilliant and an artist!

 

Arlen Schumer

Fester, do I need to explain" facetious" to you as well?

 

Fester Faceplant

Of course not, Arlen. My vocabulary is quite impeccable. My point is that by your own standards of what "art" is, anyone can copy anything else and call it their own. The truth is that RL never had an original thought in his brain...he was a hack who and a thief.Nothing anyone can say will ever be able to justify his blatant rip-offs.

 

Arlen Schumer

Fester, guess you (and Rick) didn't really read my opening thread post: "When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads out of 1965 sand and wake up and smell the 21st century? Where you've all LOST your Lichtenstein-is-not-an-artist argument?!?!?"

 

Fester Faceplant

I read it. In fact I read it yesterday. RL may have been an "artist"....but he was certainly a thief.

 

Arlen Schumer

And therefore so was Duchamp, who created the idea of "found art" and called them "ready mades," because CONTEXT is everything, which you & Rick et al still don't grasp. And you invalidate Andy Warhol's entire body of work, and jeez, he's only considered the most influential artist of the 2nd half of the 20th century (after Picasso being the 1st half's). And you invalidate the entire genres of sampling and artistic appropriation. Other than that, Fester, how's the air down there under the sand? Give Rick Stromoski my best!

 

David Chelsea Fester's idea doesn't sound that different from bob dylan's self portrait or linda ronstadt's what's new, or Joe jackson's jumping jive. Lichtenstein was a cover artist.

 

Sean Moylan

Arlen, in general, many people either do not understand or do not accept the basic concepts behind Pop Art. The more you try to explain it to them the more confused or annoyed they'll become. Sometimes, you have to pick your battles and just let people like what they like.

 

Arlen Schumer

Eggs Ackly, Sean! My problem is, I never initiate these defenses of RL; as you can see from this opening thread, my gander gets up when I read OTHERS' attempted dismissals of RL, and I just can't resist doling out some artistic reprimands! :)

 

Rick Stromoski

Perhaps if I type slowly you'll understand my point Arlen...

 

I do know the definition of facetious.

 

What I was asking you was for you to to explain how my comparing RL's direct lifting of existing imagery, altering it and then calling it his own is any different than what I demonstrated with the Mondrian. Just declaring such a comparison as "facetious" and leaving it at that isn't an argument that bolsters you opinion in any way. Those who think RL is a thief and plagerist at least give reasons why we think so.

 

Rick Stromoski

And you invalidate Andy Warhol's entire body of work, and jeez, he's only considered the most influential artist of the 2nd half of the 20th century

 

There's a huge difference between Duchamp and Warhols work with found objects and RL's out right lifting of other artists imagery.

 

Rick Stromoski

Fester's idea doesn't sound that different from bob dylan's self portrait or linda ronstadt's what's new, or Joe jackson's jumping jive. Lichtenstein was a cover artist.

 

The difference being that these artist paid royalties to the original creators of those works. RL couldn't be bothered with that.

 

Rick Stromoski

Arlen, in general, many people either do not understand or do not accept the basic concepts behind Pop Art.

 

Bullshit...one can appreciate pop art without appreciating RL. Talk about sweeping generalities

 

Arlen Schumer

Jeez, Rick, you gonna give me a chance to respond to your first post in this last bunch? The facts are, i did NOT just declare your Mondrian straw man "facetious" (or do I have to explain "straw man" to you too?) and "leave it at that"; I went ON to say: "why don't you actually examine David Barsalou's great "Deconstructing RL" site--which (inadvertabntly?) makes a case for RL as a totally legitimate artist of recontextualization (i.e., "Pop Art")--and see how much RL, like the great graphic designer he was, altered/changed/redrew/rescaled/reinterpreted his well of commercial imagery (i.e., makes "art" out of it), versus your reductive, reactionary dismissal of "...he just lifted existing work and barely altered it in any way." To which, of course, YOU did ZNZOT respond to--instead you gave me YOUR "facetious" retort: "There are an infinite number of ways one can describe or "interpret" the excrement that descends out the south end of a steer....but no matter how you pretty it up, it's still bullshit."

 

Arlen Schumer

And lastly, Rick, I love how you qualify your RL dismissals with wishy-washy phrases like, "...he just lifted existing work and barely altered it in any way." The vague adjective "barely" goes unexplained. To you and your fellow ostriches, all RL does is trace comic panels "directly" (another one of your fallacies) and "blow them up and paint them in oils." To which, AGAIN I answered without a proper, non-facetious response, "If you think that RL's paintings are DIRECT copies of their source reference as your facetious Mondrian/RL comparison, then you have either, a. not really looked at Barsalou's before/after comparisons, or b. have your anti-RL blinders on. Either way, turn in your artist badge, rick!" I stand by that response, and your lack of one as well.

 

Arlen Schumer OK, not "lastly"--because I really love this whopper of yours: "...one can appreciate pop art without appreciating RL." I would really love for you to take the time to "appreciate" another Pop Artist--why not start with the greatest, warhol?--and watch how you dig your ostrich hole deeper, as every "appreciation" of Warhol will be de facto appreciations of RL too, as if you can just insert RL's name every time you use Warhol's. Good luck!

 

Rick Stromoski

So if I actually "painted the lines I borrowed from Mondrians work, made them a tad thinner let's say and THEN flipped it and changed the colors, THEN it would be genius and historically cutting edge?

 

If anything the link bolsters mine and other RL critics argument that he was an unoriginal plagiarist.

 

this quote is quite telling from your article you linked to

 

SO WHAT if RL was inspired by those inconsequential pieces of commercial (found) art! RL recontextualized them into ART! When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads out of 1965 sand and wake up and smell the 21st century? Where you've all LOST that argument?!?!?

 

Inconsequential pieces of commercial ( found) art by inconsequential artists like Jack Kirby, Harvey Kurtzman, Joe Kubert, Gil Kane, Milton Caniff, John Romita, Bud Sagendorf and William Overgard?

Fuck off

 

Arlen Schumer

"Fuck off," Rick? You've resorted/reduced to swearing now? Ooh, am I supposed to now run away in tears with the same "personal attack" whining of yours that you attempted to do when i dared to declare your Mondrian straw man "facetious"? The fact that I wasn't even referring to those great comic artists--who are STILL great, as is RL himself, despite appropriating their, indeed, naive "commercial" art (thought of as such in those great artists' own opinions, btw)--in my opening thread post exposes you as not only ignoring each and every one of my specfic responses, but your pithy "fuck off," in print, to a friend in real life, makes you just a crybaby whose ego can't stand losing an argument.

 

David Chelsea

I'm with Arlen here, and I'll try not to swear. One doesn't have to say Bobby Freeman was a hack to say Bette Midler was an artist, or vice-versa. And it's not a moral issue. FW Murnau's Nosferatu blatantly ripped off Bram Stoker's Dracula, (without paying royalties) but film historians definitely consider Murnau an artist.

 

David Edward Martin

Gheez, is this still going on?

Film historians consider Murnau both an artists AND someone who ripped off Stoker. Art critics/historians need to show similar honesty and admit both Lichenstein and Warhol ripped off other's works while they are praising these people.

 

Rick Stromoski

You've resorted/reduced to swearing now?

I've said fuck off the the sentiment that the works of those artists were incosequential, which goes to the heart of RL's work...that comic artists are to be mocked ...now who's being sensitive?

 

I've said fuck off the the sentiment that the works of those artists were incosequential, which goes to the heart of RL's work...that comic artists are to be mocked ...now who's being sensitive?

 

And I don't concede that I've "lost" any arument...in such discussions there aren't any clear" winners"

 

You think that RL's work is brilliant. You side with gallery owners and the synchphantic art community that RL was a major pop artist... which is your perogative

 

I side with a very large group of people who make their living at creating art that feels RL was a plageristic hack in the vein of Shepard Fairey and Rob Granito, who stumbled upon a career that encompassed ripping off other people's work at the same time demeaning what they do.

 

Mike Peterson I think Barnum did a great job of recontextualizing General Tom Thumb, Chang and Eng and the Feejee Mermaid. He was a true artist ... of the bunco variety.

 

Arlen Schumer

Rick, you wrote, "I've said fuck off the the sentiment that the works of those artists were inconsequential..." even tho I've already pointed out that you didn't even read my opening thread post which indicates I was talking about the anonymous (at the time) commercial artist whose work i felt bore zero relation to RL's. So your overheated "fuck off" was misplaced to begin with. But please, Rick, don't let the facts get in the way of your emotions!

 

Arlen Schumer

And then you go on to justify your "fuck off" with this: "...which goes to the heart of RL's work...that comic artists are to be mocked." Well, only by you and your fellow ostriches. The rest of us with our heads above ground in the real world of comics AND art don't see it your absurdo reducto way. The dictionary definition (on my Apple desktop) of Pop Art is "art based on modern popular culture and the mass media, esp. as a critical or ironic comment on traditional fine art values." If you can read THAT as RL "mocking" the works of Abruzzo/Kubert/Romita/Novick et al, and not making "critical or ironic comment" on the original usage and "meaning" of those works--i.e., recontextualizing --i.e., Pop Art itself: making fine art out of commercial art--then Rick, as some comedian once said, you can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think!

 

Andrew Farago

My biggest issue with Lichtenstein comes up in your initial post, which talks about his comic book reference as "found art." Drawing inspiration from other artists is fine; lifting their compositions, dialogue, and palettes and just treating their works as raw materials for your own paintings just doesn't sit right with me. It's not Lichtenstein's fault that his work caught on, and I give him credit for moving on to other variations on the pop art/ben-day thing, but it will always stick in my crawl that artists like Russ Heath whose compositions have sold for literally millions of dollars are living on fixed incomes and probably never got so much as a postcard from Lichtenstein.

 

Arlen Schumer

Andrew, I also heard the bridges that Monet painted fell into disrepair and were torn down, while Monet's paintings of them made millions. And the western landscapes that Ansel Adams "stole" for his photographs don't get a fraction of the money for their upkeep that Adams' estate still makes off his photos. And let's see, what other totally "facetious" comparison can i make because a series should be three exampless? Oh, yeah, Warhol's Cambell soup paintings actually have made more money over time than the Campbells' company itself has made in its entire history, and Campbells is suing the Warhol Foundation for reparations!

 

Arlen Schumer

And as to the question of whether or not RL was morally/ethically/legally obligated to pay those comic artists fees to artistically appropriate their works, like recording artists have to pay for their samplings, has nothing and everything to do with said works' critical merits as Pop Art, i.e. commercial art transformed into fine art, which was the point of my opening thread in the first place, that has been reduced to the same tired, passe canards and cavils hurled by "artists" who can't tell the difference, it seems, between a literal tracing and the graphic-designed transformation going on in each and every Lichtenstein. i guess they don't actually visit David Barsalou's Deconstructing Lichtenstein site!

 

Arlen Schumer

And Rick, try directing your misplaced "fuck off" anger not at Lichtenstein (or me), but at the comic book companies themselves for not taking better financial care of their own, who sweated blood and tears for them. Why don't you write an open letter to DC and Marvel, for example, and tell them THEY should "fuck off" for not taking care of guys like Russ Heath that Andrew mentioned, since it obviously upsets you so much? I DARE YOU, Mr. Tough Guy!

 

Norman Felchle

Here's a link a friend of mine put up. I think it sheds a little light on both sides of this argument. Though.....I still come down more on Rick's side (I know Arlen....you had hopes for me...)

15 hours ago · Like

 

Norman Felchle superitch.com/?p=36

 

Super I.T.C.H » Blog Archive » Mort Pop Art Productions

superitch.com

Mort Walker, of Beetle Bailey fame, just sent me this photo of a YOUNG Pop Artis...See More

 

Arlen Schumer

And lastly, Rick (i hope!), you said that I "...side with gallery owners and the synchphantic (sic) art community that RL was a major pop artist." Calling me a sycophant? I guess only someone who doesn't know me on a personal level, who's never spent time with me on numerous social occassions over the years would call me that, or say "fuck off" to in print. I guess I must have you confused with a different rick stromoski!

 

Andrew Farago

Do bridges or soup cans have to worry about medical expenses or not having a 401(k) to fall back on in their old age? That's not really a direct comparison. Lichtenstein was a struggling artist who made good (and that's an understatement), and I've never read anything indicating that he gave a second thought to the artists who supplied him with the "found objects" that made his fortune. (Mort Walker's story about Lichtenstein meeting strip cartoonists is all well and good, but those weren't the guys whose works he'd copied, so they didn't have much reason to be upset.)

 

Norman Felchle

Personally, the Mort Walker story makes me wince. Lichtenstein may have been a genial guy and likeable....but how much can be excused by "he's just making a living, like us" I think it's interesting he didn't defend his work using any of Arlen's arguments. Was he being disingenuous here...or later? I'm tempted to believe this story. He may have been clever enough to find/sell a deeper concept behind the work....and it may have even become true in time. But he was just a guy like other guys. He had strong points...and weaknesses.

 

Andrew Farago

M.C. Hammer sold hundreds of thousands of records in the early 1990s on the strength of sampling Rick James's song Superfreak, but he didn't give him proper credit, got sued, and lost millions of dollars in the process. The Verve used an obscure symphonic version of The Rolling Stones' Sympathy for the Devil in their massive hit Bittersweet Symphony, but they didn't give proper credit, got sued, and basically lost all their earnings for that album. I guess the fact that publishers didn't see this as copyright infringement and didn't pursue any claims against Lichtenstein puts him legally in the clear, and the artists whose works he referenced didn't go after him either...but I can't get over the fact that he, an artist himself, didn't treat the comic books he copied as anything other than found objects. Cutting checks to Russ Heath, William Overgard, John Romita, et al. would've gone a long way toward getting rid of the animosity that cartoonists have toward him and his work today.

 

Norman Felchle

Yeah...artists have to trade in what we've got. Our ideas and our work. When someone takes it , it hurts. It feels like cheating. It smacks of dishonesty. I feel the same way when I see James Cameron take Roger Dean's work and make a bazillion dollars with Avatar. I hope he quietly gave him a little something ....but, I doubt it.

 

Norman Felchle

I'll also admit we all look at other artists and get inspired....or maybe even cross the line into swiping. It's not like Lichtenstein was a lone villian in a world of pure creative souls.....but still, fair's fair.....isn't it?

 

David Chelsea

We live in a more litigious age than Lichtenstein did. If Lichtenstein tried to build a career today from reworked comics panels he'd be hearing from Russ Heath or Jack Kirby's lawyers, if Shepard Fairey's experience is any guide.

 

Norman Felchle

David....I'm afraid he'd have been hearing from Marvel/Disney's lawyers. I doubt Kirby would've seen a thing from it.

 

Arlen Schumer

Hey Rick (and Robert P, if you weren't joking)--if you think you're above me...b'low me!

 

Arlen Schumer

And Rick, try directing your misplaced "fuck off" anger not at Lichtenstein (or me), but at the comic book companies themselves for not taking better financial care of their own, who sweated blood and tears for them. Why don't you write an open letter to DC and Marvel, for example, and tell them THEY should "fuck off" for not taking care of guys like Russ Heath that Andrew mentioned, since it obviously upsets you so much? I DARE YOU, Mr. Tough Guy!

 

Arlen Schumer

Rick Stromoski=Paper Tiger!

 

Pete Harrison

Roy transformed clip art into something to be hung on a wall. Given the decade, it worked and was original & refreshing; the use of benday dots on canvas was pretty clever. HOWEVER, I do appreciate David's research that lets us all know the artist that originally did the artwork.

 

Bitt Faulk

Arlen: Pop art was about using pop culture iconography in high art. There is seldom anything iconographic about the images that RL stole (with some notable exceptions). They are quite clearly incompetent reproductions. Had RL decided that the iconographic element of comics was the outline/contour-line style, the flat shading, the word balloons, and the technical printing artifacts like halftoning, he could have made some really interesting "ART", putting those elements in the context of high art. Reproducing classic art pieces in that style, for example, while not exactly a mind-boggling premise, would have shown us that he at least had the idea that there were *ideas* worth exploring. As it is, though, all he did was reproduce existing images while often destroying many of the iconographic details that are supposed to be the hallmark of pop art, like mutilating the calligraphy to the point where it's no longer recognizable as comics lettering, removing differences in line thickness, etc.

 

Tom Orzechowski

Bravo~!

 

Bitt Faulk

Thanks, Tom. Despite my distaste for Claremont X-Men, I've always considered you to be in the ranks of the comics world's best letterers. Thanks for all your hard work.

 

Arlen Schumer

Bitt, I thought the crux of your well-reasoned anti-RL post came down to your conclusion: "...his point was 'look how bad this low art is,' when it was RL himself who made it low." I think there's a lot of truth there, but in the end, it becomes subjective once again, only if you think RL's "incompetent reproductions" are indeed "incompetent"-looking! If one looks at an RL and thinks it looks like "low"/"bad") they'll agree with your dismissive assessment of RL; but, if they're like me, who looks at an RL and sees his graphically-designed recontextualizations of his found commercial art beautiful in their RL-ness, then they'll agree with my assessment of RL as the purest of Pop Artists. Because i find much of the "commercial art" RL used as subject matter as "ugly" as you find RL's works, and RL transformed them into works of art in my book--and that includes a lot of the comic book panels he used as well.

 

Bitt Faulk

Art is certainly always subjective, but, while I can understand the fondness people feel towards some things that I personally find uncompelling, there really is *nothing* positive I can see in RL's work. I'm not saying that I don't believe that you feel that way, but I certainly feel that — well — you're wrong.

 

Arlen Schumer

Funny how you can begin your post with a "certainty" that art is subjective--and then, after assuring me you "believe" that I know what I am "feeling," out of the other side of your mouth at the end of the post, you tell me I (and the larger art world that agrees with me) am "wrong"?

 

Bitt Faulk

I said I *feel* you're wrong.

 

Arlen Schumer

No, Bitt--you said you "believe" I know what I'm "feeling" about RL--thanx for that condescension too!

 

Bitt Faulk

All I meant is that I didn't think you were playing devil's advocate: that you really do have a fondness for RL. All I'm saying is (and I admit that this is a frequent cop-out) "I don't get it," and that I fail to understand what it is that you're seeing that makes you like what he's done.

 

Arlen Schumer

That's what you're saying NOW--a subjective "I don't get it" (which has been said about how many great artists, bitt? Let's see, off the top o' my head, Van Gogh, Duchamps, Warhol, etc?), versus what I called you out on, which was telling me i was "wro...See More

 

Bitt Faulk

(On a different note, about the bodybuilder RL sketch above, it would have been nice if the medical world would have taken notice of his prescient warning about thalidomide babies.)

 

Bitt Faulk

Wow, you're really taking this personally. I'm not intending to be condescending or antagonistic to you. (RL: yes; you: no.) I believe RL is a plagiarist and produced crap. You don't. That's fine. Never the twain shall meet. (BTW, I'm not sure how me claiming you are fond of RL is condescending, other than presupposing that you like an artist you're defending. But whatever. This is going nowhere.)

 

Arlen Schumer I'm NOT "taking it personally," Britt--remember, there's no tone of voice on the 'net, so you don't know that, trust me--but YOU made it "personal" by telling me i was "wrong"--I was just standing up for my intellectual points and parried you, as in any discussion/debate. Jeez, everyone's so sensitive on Facebook!

 

Arlen Schumer

It seems like all most people want to do on Facebook threads is agree with one another, like in a big circle-jerk; and when one voices an opinion that's contrary, and one engages in intellectal discussion/debate, the other gets all testy and emotional, instead of sticking to the point.

 

Tom Orzechowski

Lichtenstein was a serial plagiarist. There's no other way to describe his actions. He stole the work of others, provided no attribution, and did it repeatedly. The fact that he had no finesse in his approach is its own topic. The fact that the arts community lionizes him tells us too much about the arts community.

 

Bitt Faulk

Arlen: I'm not being testy. I believe that the art community is completely wrong in their assessment of RL. I have explained why I feel that way. I haven't seen you explain your point any more than "recontextualize!". That is the reason that this is g...See More

 

Tom Orzechowski

Clearly, I've blocked the person you're talking with, Bitt. He will accept no criticism of Lichtenstein under any circumstances. You're being a gentleman about this, but, indeed, the conversation will go nowhere except in semantic circles.

 

David Barsalou

This Quote is Disgraceful and Insulting

“Lichtenstein Borrowed ‘ Low Culture Imagery ’ Such As Comic Books To Make Art”.

Time Magazine

12/17/12

 

Arlen Schumer

Bitt, I love the way you've twisted this around to where you're the "injured party," so to speak--and i have already parried your original dismissal here of RL as just bad, poorly executed artwork as a purely subjective judgment on your part. What more do you want to hear?

 

A smug tedium reigns as Lichtenstein moves in at the Tate Modern and the artefacts of Pompeii and Herculaneum receive yet another airing at the British Museum. But at least George Bellows' arrival at the Royal Academy is something to salute.

 

A meanness of spirit made manifest by an intellectually benumbed public, quick to delight their under-developed palates for reasons they cannot articulate, has become the enemy of art.

- Jason Holmes 4/18/2013

 

October 27, 2017

To shine more light on the source material behind Roy Lichtenstein's work, comics enthusiast David Barsalou has spent more than three decades painstakingly tracking down the original strips that the artist painted after in a project called ” Deconstructing Roy Lichtenstein".

 

Andy Uhrich

12 December 2008

 

Copyright, Legal Issues, and Policy

H72.1804

Prof. Rina Pantalony

 

Now We All Live in Negativland: The Normalization of Copyright Tomfoolery

 

In many ways both legally and culturally 1991 was a different world. Most obviously and essentially, it was before the rise of the World Wide Web and its transformative revolution in how information, creative expression and commercial products are distributed, experienced and sold. This was an economic world then, before the rise of Napster and file sharing with its, to say the least, shattering effects on the business model for the content industry. It was a legal environment before the 1998 expansions of copyright in the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Term Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which brought copyright into the on-rushing digital world, but in a way designed to benefit commerce at the expense of fair use. However, by then there were a steadily growing number of artists and musicians who were creating new works based on appropriated sounds and images. Not surprisingly this got a number of them sued for copyright infringement. In the fall of 1991 sound art pranksters Negativland were sued by U2’s record and publishing companies over the uncleared samples and allegedly deceptive packaging of Negativland’s single called, provocatively, U2. Re-examining, from the viewpoint of our current digital impasse, these entertaining but dishearteningly complicated legal wranglings allows for a critique of the content industries legal response to the digital culture, a study of the origins of the counter-response by the advocates of free culture and fair use, and a reinforcement of the virtue of a purposefully imprecise copyright law.

It might be tempting for some to look at this pre-Information Superhighway era with a glint of nostalgia, almost as a simpler fin de siècle time where copyright infringement was easy to enforce, record labels where free to charge whatever they wanted for their product, and they didn’t need to sue grandmothers and teenagers for illegal downloading. Copyright law mainly had the regulatory role of promoting a free economy by preventing content providers from ripping off each other’s protected materials. It essentially required the economic and technological base of the entertainment industry to create a copy that was exact enough to infringe and that was distributable on a mass scale. Consumers could only consume.

To be sure there had been some earlier disruptions in this one way, top down commercial model of distributing culture. While these new technologies afforded the public some ability to control how and when they experienced pre-packaged culture, through time shifting or creating a mix-tape for a friend for example, the imperfect nature of analogue reproducibility limited the extent of the impact of the use. The content industry was either forced to accept and eventually reap huge profits from them, i.e. home videotape recorders, or while widely complaining about the effects – the British Phonographic Industry’s easily ridiculed “Home Taping is Killing Music” ad campaign – rather easily absorbing the minor market effects. It took digital technologies, with their stunning ease of perfect reproduction, alteration, and immediate and widespread dissemination, to truly upset the balance between content provider and consumer. This has had the by now well documented , contradictory effect of turning the wider public into felonious pirates plundering the wealth of the unexpecting entertainment industry and into activated and creative producers of a new digital folk culture. It has also brought copyright out of the purely economic sphere into our day-to-day lives regulating how we interact and experience the world around us.

Over the last century artists have played the role of the canary in the coalmine on this issue both in conceptually locating the human impulse to manipulate the increasingly mediated cultural environment and through the development of the actual methods of doing so. For the former the obvious touchstone is Marcel Duchamp’s concept of the readymade. Duchamp asserted that the true artistic act was not the previously conceived of final artwork such as a painting or a sculpture, but the mental decision of calling something “art”. The artist makes an artwork from appropriating images, objects and ideas from the world around them and it’s the conceptual gesture of doing so that transforms them from the prosaic and the natural into the aesthetic. As Duchamp showed, it didn’t matter if the original object was a urinal, a bottle rack, or the Mona Lisa suggestively detourned with an added moustache. Everything is fodder: high art, popular culture and the utilitarian.

In 1972 artist, musician and provocateur Genesis P-Orridge took Duchamp’s concept of the readymade into the realm of the copyright with his performance and related book entitled Copyright Breeches. Besides creating a punningly humorous pair of oversized trousers emblazoned with dozens of copyright symbols, instead of merely declaring already existing objects art as per Duchamp, P-Orridge asserted his copyright over them in a declaratory act of peremptory claiming . While it was obviously farcical for P-Orridge to claim copyright over things which he has no proper and legal ownership, his piece criticizes the acquisitive nature of the artists and the way the business world exploits the creative works of others. Astutely, P-Orridge highlights how the concept of what has become to be known as intellectual property undergirds and conjoins both worlds. Further, whether purposefully or not, it augurs the clashes to come between free expression and copyright control.

Until the ease of digital technologies it required the skill and drive of the artist to create a work that would irritate a copyright holder enough to claim infringement. One couldn’t just cut and paste an image of Mickey Mouse to raise the legal wrath of Disney, but you had to be a talented enough cartoonist to draw and publish a satirical and patently offensive underground comic involving trademarked and copyright protected cartoon characters as the Air Pirates did in 1971 . Or you had to have the ability to paint like Roy Lichtenstein who subtly repurposed copyrighted images from trashy pulp comic books into intentionally vague but incredibly valuable pop art objects .

Similarly, new recording technologies like videotape recorders and samplers were originally expensive enough and required enough training to limit the possibility of copyright infringement by the wider public. But with each new technology artists were immediately devising new methods of capturing the world around them, subverting and transforming the images and sounds they appropriated in manners that could not avoid infringing copyrights. According to the apocryphal origin myth of video art, in the fall of 1965 Nam June Paik purchased one of the first home video recorders – the Sony TCV-2100. Right away Paik set about recording televised images of politicians, popular figures and rock stars off the air that he manipulated and distorted . He did this as a comment on the media landscape with its emerging cult of the celebrity and as raw material for creating his cathode tube paintings where the TV screen became a new electronic canvas.

In the music world, the release of digital samplers in the late 1980s transformed the ease with which artists and musicians could use previously recorded sound as a raw element for new compositions. DJs in the hip hop world used the new technology to dramatically expand on the previously turntable-based musical form into the creatively dense soundscapes such as Public Enemy’s It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold us Back . In an example presaging the troubles of Negativland, in 1989 composer John Oswald was forced to destroy the copies of his Plunderphonics CD. The CD, which featured a cheeky collage of Michael Jackson’s head on the nude body of a woman which certainly played a part in the actions against Oswald, was a cut-up clashing jumble of samples from musicians such as Dolly Parton, Metallica, the Beatles, James Brown and Michael Jackson. Oswald’s composition is clearly an act of musical critique and commentary in the way it collapsed previously held critical notions on the differences in musical genres and styles. Oswald, who distributed the CD for free, was threatened by the Canadian Recording Industry Association to turn over the existing copies and master tapes or face criminal proceedings. Lacking the financial means to battle the CRIA in court, Oswald complied . In a manner which builds on P-Orridge’s concept of the interwoven nature of art and commerce in relation to copyright, after the Plunderphonics debacle Oswald was hired twice by the music industry to create remix CDs: one celebrating the 40th anniversary of Elektra records (label to Metallica, one of the artists on Plunderphonics) and a double disc re-imagining of the Grateful Dead’s psychedelic freak out jam “Dark Star” . This suggests that the underlying issue is not the act of manipulation of the copyright protected work that disturbs the content industry, but doing it without their permission.

Negativland used a similar technology to create the two songs on their U2 single. They sampled U2’s hit song “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For” and mixed it with clandestine outtakes of a furious Casey Kasem swearing during an un-aired dedication to the very same U2 song. Packaged in a cover emblazoned with the letter U and number 2 and an image of the spy plane, Negativland released the single as a conceptual goof on the music industry, the nature of appropriation (does the band U2 owns the phrase U2 with its Cold War connotations?) and the not so deeply veiled insincerity of an industry predicated on the commoditization of emotional connections.

Within weeks of the single’s release, on storied underground record label SST, lawyers representing U2’s label and publishing company – but not the band themselves – filed a lawsuit requesting an ex parte temporary restraining order to halt Negativland’s “exploitation” of their record. The lawsuit alleges that the single constitutes “nothing less than consumer fraud” due to the cover’s oversized U and 2 “which is so deceptive as to create the false impression that the recording of is a genuine U2 record”. The lawyers accuse Negativland of violating §43(a) of the Lanham Trademark Act and of “attempt[ing] to usurp the anticipated profits and goodwill to which plaintiffs are entitled from the exploitation of recordings and musical compositions by U2” . Once again, the lawyers were protecting the profits of the label and publishing company, not the musicians in U2.

The second part of the complaint focused on Negativland’s unauthorized use of the song “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For.” The lawyers called it a “blatant case of copyright infringement” under §101 of the Copyright Act justifying the request for the restraining order and compensation . The judge agreed with the request and issued the temporary restraining order to SST and Negativland on September 5th with a hearing set for the 15th of October.

Reading the lawsuit now – from a non-legal standpoint it must be emphasized – reveals the absurdity of presenting the U2 trademark as one easily damaged. In fact, in the narrative that the lawyers furnish to establish Island and Warner-Chappell’s as legal exclusive rights holders to sell and publish U2’s music constantly mentions the overwhelming success of U2. They state that for 11 years Island records has been “manufacturing, marketing, promoting, advertising and selling millions of records by the enormously popular recording group known as ‘U2’” . They go on to recall that U2’s The Joshua Tree album, which included the song that Negativland sampled, sold over 5 million copies alone in the United States and that album was made even more important by its winning a Grammy . The lawyers relayed an account where one of the world’s most popular bands and brands, that has sold millions and millions of records, can be usurped by a band who has pressed ten thousand copies of an album that if not stopped would “flood the shelves of record stores with the infringing recording […] creating massive confusion among the record buying public” . “Thus, some unwitting consumers, upon purchasing and listening to the ‘U2 Negativland’ recording, might well conclude that U2 has made a poor quality and offensive recording, thus further unlawfully tarnishing the band’s reputation and image, and the enormously valuable “U2” name and mark” .

Clearly, this is a hyperbolic legal form of writing designed to make an overwhelmingly convincing point in court. The point of bringing this up is not to suggest that there is some cut off point of damages under which pirates and bootleggers can operate outside of the law or that the plaintiffs were outside of their right as copyright holders. Instead it is to highlight that the lawyers, who were not required to prove damages or that any unwitting customers actually purchased the Negativland record thinking it was the new U2 record to request compensation, developed a legal case that might prevail in court but in the public arena ended up making U2 the heavy and Negativland the aggrieved party. This tin ear for judging the public opinion would return in their policy of litigation that the recording industry levied on individuals accused of illegal downloading a decade later .

Similarly to the Oswald case, SST settled with Island and Warner-Chappell stating at the time that the $90,000 of losses and fines incurred by settling out of court would be significantly less than the expected $250,000 in legal fees that a defense would cost, regardless of whether they were successful or not . The label agreed to hand over all copies of the recording and refrain from in any way infringing on U2’s trademark or copyright. The settlement effectively gave Island Records the rights to Negativland’s recording.

Instead of what should have been the end of a rather unfortunate audio prank became even more tortuous as Negative decided to continue fighting for their cause in the public arena. First, they parted ways with their label as SST was insisting the band was responsible for all of the damages. They kept their case on the media radar via attempts to convince Island founder Chris Blackwell to release the record as a b-side to a U2 record since “interest in the single is higher than ever” , entreaties to Casey Kasem, and ambushing U2’s the Edge in an interview where they hit him up for a loan to pay off their legal fees and release a new record .

In August of 1992 they released a magazine which compiled all the documents of the case – the original lawsuit, settlement, press clippings, letters and faxes between the parties, and the interview with the Edge – and a CD of an audio collage mixing together purposefully infringed copyright protected material and a treatise on fair use. SST immediately sued them for copyright infringement based on unauthorized publication of internal SST documents. The band and SST eventually settled out of court by allowing the label to release an essentially unauthorized live recording of Negativland and any parodies of Negativland if it so desired. Through a combination of relentlessly irritating Island records, appealing to U2’s better artistic impulses, and garnering the Irish band bad press over the suit Negativland had by the summer of 1994 convinced Island and U2 to return the offending recordings back to Negativland. While insisting that any contract indemnify U2 and Island from any legal actions that Kasem might take, according to U2’s manager Paul McGuinness the main condition for the return was “that you [Negativland] stop writing us” .

In 1995, Negativland released an expanding book version of the magazine that had earlier got them into legal trouble with SST. The book, Fair Use: The Story of the Letter U and the Numeral 2 includes paper records that document the events after the earlier magazine and an appendix with essays on fair use, artistic appropriation, and the Supreme Court ruling on the 2 Live Crew Case. The book, with its in-depth paper trail of records from all sides, allows for a fascinating study of the legal and economic issues that result from copyright suits. Further, read from the vantage of the digital now, the book is a legal and cultural time capsule of a transitional era where just emerging technologies, which as the Negativland case shows were already roiling the legal waters, were on the cusp of completely transforming the relationship between producer and consumer.

Negativland and the book have played no small role in that transformation given their role in the free culture and fair use advocate groups that have arisen to counter what they see as the overreaching power grab by the content industry. Through the course of the book it is interesting to see Negativland adopting the tenets and cause of fair use whereas their original response was one of the freedom of artistic appropriation and first rights amendments. At some point after the lawsuits they became acquainted with Lawrence Lessig and the legal decision on the 2 Live Crew case ; both of which seems to have catalyzed their thinking on fair use and copyright. Without overplaying them or the books importance, it should be noted that their advocacy for fair use and their legal problems brought the issue to the underground independent culture, many of whom later became strong proponents of the freedom of artistic expression. An example of this would be someone like Carrie McLaren who at the time of the 1991 U2 Negativland lawsuit was a college radio music director and in 2002 curated the Illegal Art exhibit which featured work by Negativland and other artists stretching the boundaries of copyright . Negativland have continued their crusade against corporate control of expression; in 2003 they developed the sampling license for Creative Commons and just this fall Negativland member Mark Hosler lobbied members of Congress for copyright law revisions for the Digital Freedom Campaign .

In addition the book offers an opportunity to study a pre-Internet case of copyright infringement for the purposes of charting the origins and transformations of the current legal response by the music industry to the overwhelming flood of peer-to-peer copyright violations. One point that becomes quickly obvious regards whose benefits the lawsuits are designed to protect. As discussed earlier the lawsuit against Negativland was filed by U2’s record label and publishing company. Obviously, it is the norm in the industry for musicians to assign their label and publishing company the right of representation in legal matters, but seeing the business relationship laid out so starkly as it is in the lawsuit is revelatory. According to Eric Levine of Island Records: "record companies' primary assets are rights - copyrights, exclusive rights for recording services, names, trademarks etc” . So it’s not the actual songs or musicians that the music industry are selling, but the right to access and use them.

In both the Negativland case and the current lawsuits the goal of the content industry is to use its legal power to tamp down on behavior that it deems economically threatening. The content industry has the financial advantage of being able to pay for lawyers that Negativland didn’t and most defendants still don’t. Since the vast majority of these cases are settled out of court , this has the incredibly dangerous effect of limiting the discourse of copyright to one that favors corporate interests, as most cases do not reach the level of adjudication that might rule on issues such as fair use. This has the effect of criminalizing behavior that has not been proven so in court; it diminishes the presumption of innocence that the legal system is predicated on .

The entertainment industry’s campaign, while in no means effective , certainly shocks those on the receiving end of a lawsuit. When asked in 1995 if the lawsuit has forced Negativland to consider legal issues in a way that might limit their creativity, Hosler responds “Yeah, to some degree we probably will. It's just hellish to get sued” . In 2008, the mother of a college student who was sued for copyright infringement and was chastened by the $220,000 court ruling against Jamie Thomas said “I'm just so scared. I think we're just probably going to settle. I don't even want to go to court” . Stephanie Lenz, whose case is discussed below, states:

“[When recording home videos] I’m constantly thinking about what’s going on in the background, what’s on the TV, what’s on the CD player, the characters on my kid’s clothes, the characters on the toys they are playing with. I’m cognizant of what’s going of what’s going on at every step, instead of focusing on my kids, which is where my attention should be” .

 

One important lesson from the Negativland case is that while they were crushed into complying with the original lawsuit’s demands, in the end they essentially won. Through pleading their case in the media and doggedly pursuing U2 and Island Records Negativland got their supposedly illicit recordings returned to them. The results of that return contradict the lawsuit’s hysterical claims that allowing Negativland’s recording to be distributed would cause irreparable harm to U2’s image and record sale; clearly no such thing has happened. Negativland re-released the recordings in an expanded form in 2001 and has had absolutely no effect on U2’s market share or trademark.

While this example does not necessarily pertain to the lawsuits against peer-to-peer file sharing, it is directly germane to the industry’s response of re-used and re-mixed copyright protected content that shows up, among other places, on YouTube. Yes, such behavior is unauthorized, but not only is there no proof of actual economic harm, but in this era of splintering audiences the content industry should instead take advantage of this new form of marketing. In the case of the Stephanie Lenz video where her infant son dances to “Let’s Go Crazy”, Prince and Universal instead of issuing a take down notice to YouTube could have leveraged the video and its audience by placing an ad for a new Prince album or a link to a site with a discounted mp3 of the now 24 year old song . Lenz, who is being represented by the Electronic Freedom Frontier, may not win her countersuit against Universal, but her case has resulted in a potentially significant ruling dictating that copyright holders must take into account issues of fair use and market impact before issuing take down notices .

That the economic and legal power resides with the content industry, but the social and moral power is with the public is just one of the ironies that the Negativland case unveils. Another is the fact that, as mentioned, the recordings were eventually returned to Negativland implying a fluid subjective nature to ascribing copyright infringement. These recordings are now available for free from Negativland’s website with a reproduction of the original cover or for sale in the expanded form from iTunes, where they are encrypted by Apple’s FairPlay DRM which restricts their use and raise the possibility of breaking §1201 of the copyright law if someone were to crack their digital protection.

As an example of the appropriator becoming the appropriated, Negativland themselves were sampled in 1991 on Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch’s Music for the People, the album that made Mark Wahlberg a star

In a manner reminiscent of P-Orridge’s blurring of art and commerce, at the time of the lawsuit Negativland and U2 were engaged in similar critiques of mass media and used similar technologies to appropriate copyright protected materials. In describing the concept behind the U2 single Negativland member Don Joyce says "we did it for laughs and because tricksters and jesters are the last hope against corporate music bureaucracies, which have all but killed grassroots inspiration" . Using similar rhetoric Bono describes the inspiration behind their Zoo TV tour: "The media has rock and roll by the balls," Bono says, almost snarling. "They draw cartoons, and it's indelible ink. It's an attempt to reduce you, your humanity, your sense of humor. The only way to deal

DECONSTRUCTING ROY LICHTENSTEIN

BEFORE AND AFTER

 

EDWARD D'ANCONA

circa 1940's

 

ROY LICHTENSTEIN

Man With Coat 1961

 

It would seem that Lichtenstein was even less original than many of his existing detractors had thought.

 

Although Lichtenstein had been using comic book imagery in his paintings since 1957, he did not do large canvases reproducing single comic strip panels featuring speech balloons until he painted Look Mickey in the summer of 1961 - four months after he had, by his own admission, seen Warhol's canvases. Warhol had been painting single comic strip panels featuring speech balloons since 1960 - a year earlier than Lichtenstein. It is possible that Lichtenstein, as Warhol suspected, had seen Warhol's paintings at Bonwit Teller, although Lichtenstein never mentioned it in interviews. In any case, Lichtenstein admitted having seen Warhol's cartoon paintings prior to doing his own single panel comic strip paintings featuring speech balloons (Look Mickey).

 

www.warholstars.org/warhol1/11roylichtenstein.html

 

Edward D'Ancona was a prolific pin-up artist who produced hundreds of enjoyable images, almost nothing is known about his background. He sometimes signed his paintings with the name "D'Amarie", but his real name appears on numerous calendar prints published from the mid 1930s through the mid 1950s, and perhaps as late as 1960.

 

The first company to publish D'Ancona pin-ups, about 1935 to 1937, was Louis F. Dow in St Paul. D'Ancona worked in oil on canvas and his originals from that time usually measured about 30 x 22 inches. His early work is comparable in quality to that of the young Gil Elvgren, who had begun to work for Dow in 1937. Because D'Ancona produced so much work for Dow, one might assume that he was born in Minnesota and lived and worked in the St Paul, Minneapolis area. It is known that he supplied illustrations to the Goes Company in Cincinnati and to several soft-drink firms, which capitalized on his works similarity to the Sundblom/Elvgren style, which was so identified with Coca-Cola. During the 1940s and 1950s, D'Ancona's superb use of primary colors, masterful brushstrokes, and painterly style elevated him to the ranks of the very best artist in pin-up and glamour art. His subject matter at this time resembled Elvgren's. Both enjoyed painting nudes and both employed situation poses a great deal. D'Ancona also painted a fair amount of evening-gown scenes, as did Elvgren, Frahm, and Erbit.

 

By 1960, D'Ancona had moved into the calendar art field. Instead of doing pin-ups and glamour images, however, he specialized in pictures on the theme of safety in which wholesorne policemen helped children across the street in suburban settings that came straight out of Norrnan Rockwell.

 

Edward D'Ancona

 

Although D'Ancona was a prolific pin-up artist who produced hundreds of enjoyable images, relatively little is known about his background.

 

He sometimes signed his paintings with the name "D'Amarie", but his real name appears on numerous calendar prints published from the mid 1930s through the mid 1950s, and perhaps as late as 1960.

 

The first company to publish D'Ancona pin-ups, about 1935 to 1937, was Louis F. Dow in St Paul. D'Ancona worked in oil on canvas and his originals from that time usually measured about 30 x 22 inches. His early work is comparable in quality to that of the young Gil Elvgren, who had begun to work for Dow in 1937. Because D'Ancona produced so much work for Dow, one might assume that he was born in Minnesota and lived and worked in the St Paul, Minneapolis area. It is known that he supplied illustrations to the Goes Company in Cincinnati and to several soft-drink firms, which capitalized on his works similarity to the Sundblom/Elvgren style, which was so identified with Coca-Cola.

 

During the 1940s and 1950s, D'Ancona superb use of primary colours, masterful brushstrokes, and painterly style elevated him to the ranks of the very best artist in pin-up and pin-up art. His subject matter at this time resembled Elvgren's. Both enjoyed painting nudes and both employed situation poses a great deal. D'Ancona also painted a fair amount of evening-gown scenes, as did Elvgren, Art Frahm and Erbit.

 

By 1960, D'Ancona had moved into the calendar art field. Instead of doing pin-ups and glamour images, however, he specialized in pictures on the theme of safety in which wholesome policemen helped children across the street in suburban settings that came straight out of Norman Rockwell.

 

Edward D'Ancona biography borrowed from The Great American Pin-up by Charles G. Martignette & Louis K. Meisel.

 

DECONSTRUCTING ROY LICHTENSTEIN

BEFORE AND AFTER

 

EDWARD D'ANCONA

Limbering Up

circa 1940's

 

ROY LICHTENSTEIN

Man Exercising 1961

 

It would seem that Lichtenstein was even less original than many of his existing detractors had thought.

 

Although Lichtenstein had been using comic book imagery in his paintings since 1957, he did not do large canvases reproducing single comic strip panels featuring speech balloons until he painted Look Mickey in the summer of 1961 - four months after he had, by his own admission, seen Warhol's canvases. Warhol had been painting single comic strip panels featuring speech balloons since 1960 - a year earlier than Lichtenstein. It is possible that Lichtenstein, as Warhol suspected, had seen Warhol's paintings at Bonwit Teller, although Lichtenstein never mentioned it in interviews. In any case, Lichtenstein admitted having seen Warhol's cartoon paintings prior to doing his own single panel comic strip paintings featuring speech balloons (Look Mickey).

 

www.warholstars.org/warhol1/11roylichtenstein.html

  

ARLEN SCHUMER

These comparisons are absolutely ridiculous; SO WHAT if RL was inspired by those inconsequential pieces of commercial (found) art! RL recontextualized them into ART! When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads out of 1965 sand and wake up and smell the 21st century? Where you've all LOST that argument?!?!?

 

Darryl Alexander Moore

I LOVE Lichtenstein! As an art teacher, I just finished doing art assignments based on his works just last week.

 

Arlen Schumer

Darryl--invite me come to your class and do a Lichtenstein lecture! www.arlenschumer.com/visualectures

 

Mike Hall

I've never researched the matter enough to understand the Lichtenstein hatred. Yes, he appropriated some some comic book images...which he then re-purposed (with alterations!) into commentaries on an entire STYLE of pop art. What exactly is wrong with that? It's not much different than mixed media art which uses photos and found objects to say something entirely different than what was originally said by the photos and found objects!

 

Arlen Schumer

OY VEY, Mike, just scroll thru my own wall for past threads re: RL that expose the absolute virulence with which they hate RL; in fact, here's one of my own recent ri postes to their deadly combination of ignorance (they're still stuck in '65, with the same tired criticisms of tracing/stealing that you & i both thought were left behind) and arrogance (because they're comic book art fans, they think they know what they're talking about): "For the umpteenth time, if all you (and most other "comic fans" like you too, Fester?) think RL did was simply trace a comic book panel (and Mort, I'm surprised that you, an accomplished pro, would know there are worlds of difference between simply tracing an image vs. creating an entirely new work based on that reference, be it photo or illo), wake up and smell 2012--it ain't 1963 anymore, when middlebrow art critics said the same thing you're still harping on! RL proved them and you all wrong with the depth and breadth of his work over the years. If you invalidate RL, you invalidate ALL of Pop Art, not to mention the arts of sampling, appropriation and found art. Good luck with all that! Me, I will still be admiring RL's work as the great graphic designer he was, recontextualizing comic art and other commercial art into paintings that have stood the test of time--while your lame, stale canards and cavils are as dated and passe as they are pointless."

 

Mike Hall

It's ridiculous. Of course, these same people probably have NO IDEA how much fine art AND comic art rely on photo reference, or how widespread use of the camera obscura was in the arts before photography. As for RL, it takes a trained eye maybe 3 seconds to see the differences between what RL did and the panels he borrowed from; the differences are almost immediately apparent, and his intent is pretty clear.

 

Arlen Schumer

So then, Mike, explain why SO many professional (comic) artists--who, like I indicated in my previous post, SHOULD KNOW BETTER--are STILL wallowing in their own arrogant ignorance re: RL?

 

Mike Hall

Like I said, I have no idea. Lack of formal art education/reading on the subject? Hyper-sensitivity to the concept of sampling and how it can/should be used in art? Parroting sentiments expressed by others? It's a mystery to me. :)

 

Arlen Schumer

All of the above!

 

Coby L Cyr

wow...those two images look SO much alike! (sarcasm intended) He turned the idea into a beautiful piece. I do this a lot in my art work...I guess I'm a unimaginative wannabe illustrator also...wait...I do many more pieces that are original also, but I guess people will get stuck on reference pieces *sigh*

 

Arlen Schumer

Eggs Ackley, Coby!

 

Rick Stromoski

And James Frey was an excellent author!

 

Arlen Schumer

care to elaborate, rick? :) the 2 are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!

 

Arlen Schumer

Mike Hall, Rick Stromoski is EXACTLY the artist we've been discussing! :)

 

Rick Stromoski

And Shepard Fairey is an amazingly original poster artist!

 

Arlen Schumer

stick to the subject, rick! or CAN you?

 

Rick Stromoski

Sorry I prefer to wallow in my arrogant ignorance

 

Arlen Schumer

if the shoe fits, rick, wear it!

 

David Edward Martin

Lichenstein is a plagiarist. Period.

If he had acknowledged the artists whose works he copied, it would not have been so bad.

If he had given those artists a share of the millions he made copying their work, it would have been great.

But in the end, he was just a plagiarist and a fraud.

 

Coby L Cyr

Hmmm, actually, if this following link is correct....that is pretty bad. I was commenting on the images posted in the original link here. This link I found IS pretty extreme and far beyond "referencing" =/ You have to agree a little bit on this Arlen...

davidbarsalou.homestead.com/LICHTENSTEINPROJECT.html

 

Robert Pincombe

We've come far enough in this discussion for me to say only that the particular works for which Lichtenstein is most renowned are his least artistic works with little context from him and no imagination. Forget arguing plagiarism. All artists take from the world and arts around them. So I won't worry about the whole, who's panel is in this painting and just say, his brilliance was in selling his least interesting works as his greatest. Christ, the whole Lichtenstein debates of the last thirty years are the true artistic achievement. Just as Andy Warhol was his own greatest creation, so too is Lichtenstein himself his greatest piece of work.

 

Coby L Cyr

And that's why I come here...to get some education and insight into others views. Love it

 

Pete Harrison

Roy transformed clip art into something to be hung on a wall. Given the decade, it worked and was original & refreshing; the use of benday dots on canvas was pretty clever. HOWEVER, I do appreciate David's research that lets us all know the artist that originally did the artwork.

 

Arlen Schumer shared a link.

These comparisons are absolutely ridiculous; SO WHAT if Roy Lichtenstein was inspired by these inconsequential pieces of commercial (found) art! RL recontextualized them into ART! When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads...See More

 

Deconstructing roy lichtenstein - before and after

www.flickr.com

DECONSTRUCTING ROY LICHTENSTEIN BEFORE AND AFTER EDWARD D'ANCONA Limbering Up circa 1940's ROY LICHTENSTEIN Man Exercising 1961 It would seem that Lichtenstein was even less original than many of his existing detractors had thought. Although Lichtenstein had been using comic book imagery in hi...

Mark Staff Brandl and 6 others like this.

 

Mike Hall

I've never researched the matter enough to understand the Lichtenstein hatred. Yes, he appropriated some some comic book images...which he then re-purposed (with alterations!) into commentaries on an entire STYLE of pop art. What exactly is wrong with that? It's not much different than mixed media art which uses photos and found objects to say something entirely different than what was originally said by the photos and found objects!

 

Arlen Schumer OY VEY, Mike, just scroll thru my own wall for past threads re: RL that expose the absolute virulence with which they hate RL; in fact, here's one of my own recent ripostes to their deadly combination of ignorance (they're still stuck in '65, with the same tired criticisms of tracing/stealing that you & i both thought were left behind) and arrogance (because they're comic book art fans, they think they know what they're talking about): "For the umpteenth time, if all you (and most other "comic fans" like you too, Fester?) think RL did was simply trace a comic book panel (and Mort, I'm surprised that you, an accomplished pro, would know there are worlds of difference between simply tracing an image vs. creating an entirely new work based on that reference, be it photo or illo), wake up and smell 2012--it ain't 1963 anymore, when middlebrow art critics said the same thing you're still harping on! RL proved them and you all wrong with the depth and breadth of his work over the years. If you invalidate RL, you invalidate ALL of Pop Art, not to mention the arts of sampling, appropriation and found art. Good luck with all that! Me, I will still be admiring RL's work as the great graphic designer he was, recontextualizing comic art and other commercial art into paintings that have stood the test of time--while your lame, stale canards and cavils are as dated and passe as they are pointless."

 

Mike Hall

It's ridiculous. Of course, these same people probably have NO IDEA how much fine art AND comic art rely on photo reference, or how widespread use of the camera obscura was in the arts before photography. As for RL, it takes a trained eye maybe 3 seconds to see the differences between what RL did and the panels he borrowed from; the differences are almost immediately apparent, and his intent is pretty clear.

 

Shelly Crowley

Good Morning Arlen you wicked Man! :)

 

Arlen Schumer

Sorry you're so "hurt," Rick--when 1. I started this friggin' thread; 2. I started out being GENERAL in my criticisms of RL haters; and 3. you joined the thread voluntarily and posted your predictable RL attacks--so what, i don't have the "right" to spar with you verbally (especially someone I've known over the years and spent many dinners together with)? And then you complain that you're being "personally insulted"? Jeez, Rick, how thin IS your skin?

 

Arlen Schumer

Can't take the "heat" of debate, then don't come in the kitchen, rick!

 

Arlen Schumer

Hey shelly--you've come right in the middle of some anti-sensitivity counseling! :)

 

Shelly Crowley I

see that .....Still Love you my Witty Friend!

 

Arlen Schumer

Wow, rick, for someone who works in "funny" comics, you certainly have NO sense of humor! What the hell do I have to do, put a smiley-face icon after phrases like "turn in your artist badge" and "Captain Facetious"?!?!? And every other quote of mine you've pulled to justify your "hurt" feelings? Grown the eff up, man!

 

Arlen Schumer

Shelly--at least SOMEONE gets my "wittiness"!!! Where have you been all my life?

 

Arlen Schumer

And Rick, calling your argument "facetious" is a "personal attack" in your eyes? wow...rick, I called your ARGUMENT facetious, not YOU! Man, you're something!

 

Shelly Crowley

Hiding in a tiny cabin deep in a forest ...Snicker*

 

Steve Elworth

Are people going to start attacking Andy Warhol next? RL attacks have gone from arracking him from taking comics too seriously to ripping off these great artists pf comics? Enough!!!

 

Rick Stromoski

And Rick, calling your argument "facetious" is a "personal attack" in your eyes?

Not so much a personal attack ...more like dismissive. If you;re going to declare something facetious you need to explain why. Otherwise it's arguing by fiat/

 

Arlen Schumer

Now I ned to explain to you what the word facetious means in regards to how & why I used it? Well, gee, Rick, you attempted to "dismiss" RL's work by choosing a Mondrian and then creating an exact duplicate of it, only with the colors slightly changed; the dictionary def of "facetious" is: "treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor; flippant." Sorry, but if you couldn't figure that out for yourself, that's your problem--it's not my "job" to explain every step of a debate/discussion/argument to you--it's YOUR job to figure that out.

 

Fester Faceplant

I'm going to copy all of Bruce Springsteen's songs , just re-record them slightly, and call them my own. I'll make millions of dollars and people will call me brilliant and an artist!

 

Arlen Schumer

Fester, do I need to explain" facetious" to you as well?

 

Fester Faceplant

Of course not, Arlen. My vocabulary is quite impeccable. My point is that by your own standards of what "art" is, anyone can copy anything else and call it their own. The truth is that RL never had an original thought in his brain...he was a hack who and a thief.Nothing anyone can say will ever be able to justify his blatant rip-offs.

 

Arlen Schumer

Fester, guess you (and Rick) didn't really read my opening thread post: "When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads out of 1965 sand and wake up and smell the 21st century? Where you've all LOST your Lichtenstein-is-not-an-artist argument?!?!?"

 

Fester Faceplant

I read it. In fact I read it yesterday. RL may have been an "artist"....but he was certainly a thief.

 

Arlen Schumer

And therefore so was Duchamp, who created the idea of "found art" and called them "ready mades," because CONTEXT is everything, which you & Rick et al still don't grasp. And you invalidate Andy Warhol's entire body of work, and jeez, he's only considered the most influential artist of the 2nd half of the 20th century (after Picasso being the 1st half's). And you invalidate the entire genres of sampling and artistic appropriation. Other than that, Fester, how's the air down there under the sand? Give Rick Stromoski my best!

 

David Chelsea Fester's idea doesn't sound that different from bob dylan's self portrait or linda ronstadt's what's new, or Joe jackson's jumping jive. Lichtenstein was a cover artist.

 

Sean Moylan

Arlen, in general, many people either do not understand or do not accept the basic concepts behind Pop Art. The more you try to explain it to them the more confused or annoyed they'll become. Sometimes, you have to pick your battles and just let people like what they like.

 

Arlen Schumer

Eggs Ackly, Sean! My problem is, I never initiate these defenses of RL; as you can see from this opening thread, my gander gets up when I read OTHERS' attempted dismissals of RL, and I just can't resist doling out some artistic reprimands! :)

 

Rick Stromoski

Perhaps if I type slowly you'll understand my point Arlen...

 

I do know the definition of facetious.

 

What I was asking you was for you to to explain how my comparing RL's direct lifting of existing imagery, altering it and then calling it his own is any different than what I demonstrated with the Mondrian. Just declaring such a comparison as "facetious" and leaving it at that isn't an argument that bolsters you opinion in any way. Those who think RL is a thief and plagerist at least give reasons why we think so.

 

Rick Stromoski

And you invalidate Andy Warhol's entire body of work, and jeez, he's only considered the most influential artist of the 2nd half of the 20th century

 

There's a huge difference between Duchamp and Warhols work with found objects and RL's out right lifting of other artists imagery.

 

Rick Stromoski

Fester's idea doesn't sound that different from bob dylan's self portrait or linda ronstadt's what's new, or Joe jackson's jumping jive. Lichtenstein was a cover artist.

 

The difference being that these artist paid royalties to the original creators of those works. RL couldn't be bothered with that.

 

Rick Stromoski

Arlen, in general, many people either do not understand or do not accept the basic concepts behind Pop Art.

 

Bullshit...one can appreciate pop art without appreciating RL. Talk about sweeping generalities

 

Arlen Schumer

Jeez, Rick, you gonna give me a chance to respond to your first post in this last bunch? The facts are, i did NOT just declare your Mondrian straw man "facetious" (or do I have to explain "straw man" to you too?) and "leave it at that"; I went ON to say: "why don't you actually examine David Barsalou's great "Deconstructing RL" site--which (inadvertabntly?) makes a case for RL as a totally legitimate artist of recontextualization (i.e., "Pop Art")--and see how much RL, like the great graphic designer he was, altered/changed/redrew/rescaled/reinterpreted his well of commercial imagery (i.e., makes "art" out of it), versus your reductive, reactionary dismissal of "...he just lifted existing work and barely altered it in any way." To which, of course, YOU did ZNZOT respond to--instead you gave me YOUR "facetious" retort: "There are an infinite number of ways one can describe or "interpret" the excrement that descends out the south end of a steer....but no matter how you pretty it up, it's still bullshit."

 

Arlen Schumer

And lastly, Rick, I love how you qualify your RL dismissals with wishy-washy phrases like, "...he just lifted existing work and barely altered it in any way." The vague adjective "barely" goes unexplained. To you and your fellow ostriches, all RL does is trace comic panels "directly" (another one of your fallacies) and "blow them up and paint them in oils." To which, AGAIN I answered without a proper, non-facetious response, "If you think that RL's paintings are DIRECT copies of their source reference as your facetious Mondrian/RL comparison, then you have either, a. not really looked at Barsalou's before/after comparisons, or b. have your anti-RL blinders on. Either way, turn in your artist badge, rick!" I stand by that response, and your lack of one as well.

 

Arlen Schumer OK, not "lastly"--because I really love this whopper of yours: "...one can appreciate pop art without appreciating RL." I would really love for you to take the time to "appreciate" another Pop Artist--why not start with the greatest, warhol?--and watch how you dig your ostrich hole deeper, as every "appreciation" of Warhol will be de facto appreciations of RL too, as if you can just insert RL's name every time you use Warhol's. Good luck!

 

Rick Stromoski

So if I actually "painted the lines I borrowed from Mondrians work, made them a tad thinner let's say and THEN flipped it and changed the colors, THEN it would be genius and historically cutting edge?

 

If anything the link bolsters mine and other RL critics argument that he was an unoriginal plagiarist.

 

this quote is quite telling from your article you linked to

 

SO WHAT if RL was inspired by those inconsequential pieces of commercial (found) art! RL recontextualized them into ART! When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads out of 1965 sand and wake up and smell the 21st century? Where you've all LOST that argument?!?!?

 

Inconsequential pieces of commercial ( found) art by inconsequential artists like Jack Kirby, Harvey Kurtzman, Joe Kubert, Gil Kane, Milton Caniff, John Romita, Bud Sagendorf and William Overgard?

Fuck off

 

Arlen Schumer

"Fuck off," Rick? You've resorted/reduced to swearing now? Ooh, am I supposed to now run away in tears with the same "personal attack" whining of yours that you attempted to do when i dared to declare your Mondrian straw man "facetious"? The fact that I wasn't even referring to those great comic artists--who are STILL great, as is RL himself, despite appropriating their, indeed, naive "commercial" art (thought of as such in those great artists' own opinions, btw)--in my opening thread post exposes you as not only ignoring each and every one of my specfic responses, but your pithy "fuck off," in print, to a friend in real life, makes you just a crybaby whose ego can't stand losing an argument.

 

David Chelsea

I'm with Arlen here, and I'll try not to swear. One doesn't have to say Bobby Freeman was a hack to say Bette Midler was an artist, or vice-versa. And it's not a moral issue. FW Murnau's Nosferatu blatantly ripped off Bram Stoker's Dracula, (without paying royalties) but film historians definitely consider Murnau an artist.

 

David Edward Martin Gheez, is this still going on?

Film historians consider Murnau both an artists AND someone who ripped off Stoker. Art critics/historians need to show similar honesty and admit both Lichenstein and Warhol ripped off other's works while they are praising these people.

 

Rick Stromoski You've resorted/reduced to swearing now?

I've said fuck off the the sentiment that the works of those artists were incosequential, which goes to the heart of RL's work...that comic artists are to be mocked ...now who's being sensitive?

 

I've said fuck off the the sentiment that the works of those artists were incosequential, which goes to the heart of RL's work...that comic artists are to be mocked ...now who's being sensitive?

 

And I don't concede that I've "lost" any arument...in such discussions there aren't any clear" winners"

 

You think that RL's work is brilliant. You side with gallery owners and the synchphantic art community that RL was a major pop artist... which is your perogative

 

I side with a very large group of people who make their living at creating art that feels RL was a plageristic hack in the vein of Shepard Fairey and Rob Granito, who stumbled upon a career that encompassed ripping off other people's work at the same time demeaning what they do.

 

Mike Peterson I think Barnum did a great job of recontextualizing General Tom Thumb, Chang and Eng and the Feejee Mermaid. He was a true artist ... of the bunco variety.

 

Arlen Schumer

Rick, you wrote, "I've said fuck off the the sentiment that the works of those artists were inconsequential..." even tho I've already pointed out that you didn't even read my opening thread post which indicates I was talking about the anonymous (at the time) commercial artist whose work i felt bore zero relation to RL's. So your overheated "fuck off" was misplaced to begin with. But please, Rick, don't let the facts get in the way of your emotions!

 

Arlen Schumer And then you go on to justify your "fuck off" with this: "...which goes to the heart of RL's work...that comic artists are to be mocked." Well, only by you and your fellow ostriches. The rest of us with our heads above ground in the real world of comics AND art don't see it your absurdo reducto way. The dictionary definition (on my Apple desktop) of Pop Art is "art based on modern popular culture and the mass media, esp. as a critical or ironic comment on traditional fine art values." If you can read THAT as RL "mocking" the works of Abruzzo/Kubert/Romita/Novick et al, and not making "critical or ironic comment" on the original usage and "meaning" of those works--i.e., recontextualizing --i.e., Pop Art itself: making fine art out of commercial art--then Rick, as some comedian once said, you can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think!

 

Andrew Farago

My biggest issue with Lichtenstein comes up in your initial post, which talks about his comic book reference as "found art." Drawing inspiration from other artists is fine; lifting their compositions, dialogue, and palettes and just treating their works as raw materials for your own paintings just doesn't sit right with me. It's not Lichtenstein's fault that his work caught on, and I give him credit for moving on to other variations on the pop art/ben-day thing, but it will always stick in my crawl that artists like Russ Heath whose compositions have sold for literally millions of dollars are living on fixed incomes and probably never got so much as a postcard from Lichtenstein.

 

Arlen Schumer

Andrew, I also heard the bridges that Monet painted fell into disrepair and were torn down, while Monet's paintings of them made millions. And the western landscapes that Ansel Adams "stole" for his photographs don't get a fraction of the money for their upkeep that Adams' estate still makes off his photos. And let's see, what other totally "facetious" comparison can i make because a series should be three exampless? Oh, yeah, Warhol's Cambell soup paintings actually have made more money over time than the Campbells' company itself has made in its entire history, and Campbells is suing the Warhol Foundation for reparations!

 

Arlen Schumer

And as to the question of whether or not RL was morally/ethically/legally obligated to pay those comic artists fees to artistically appropriate their works, like recording artists have to pay for their samplings, has nothing and everything to do with said works' critical merits as Pop Art, i.e. commercial art transformed into fine art, which was the point of my opening thread in the first place, that has been reduced to the same tired, passe canards and cavils hurled by "artists" who can't tell the difference, it seems, between a literal tracing and the graphic-designed transformation going on in each and every Lichtenstein. i guess they don't actually visit David Barsalou's Deconstructing Lichtenstein site!

 

Arlen Schumer

And Rick, try directing your misplaced "fuck off" anger not at Lichtenstein (or me), but at the comic book companies themselves for not taking better financial care of their own, who sweated blood and tears for them. Why don't you write an open letter to DC and Marvel, for example, and tell them THEY should "fuck off" for not taking care of guys like Russ Heath that Andrew mentioned, since it obviously upsets you so much? I DARE YOU, Mr. Tough Guy!

 

Norman Felchle

Here's a link a friend of mine put up. I think it sheds a little light on both sides of this argument. Though.....I still come down more on Rick's side (I know Arlen....you had hopes for me...)

15 hours ago · Like

 

Norman Felchle superitch.com/?p=36

 

Super I.T.C.H » Blog Archive » Mort Pop Art Productions

superitch.com

Mort Walker, of Beetle Bailey fame, just sent me this photo of a YOUNG Pop Artis...See More

  

Arlen Schumer

And lastly, Rick (i hope!), you said that I "...side with gallery owners and the synchphantic (sic) art community that RL was a major pop artist." Calling me a sycophant? I guess only someone who doesn't know me on a personal level, who's never spent time with me on numerous social occassions over the years would call me that, or say "fuck off" to in print. I guess I must have you confused with a different rick stromoski!

 

Andrew Farago

Do bridges or soup cans have to worry about medical expenses or not having a 401(k) to fall back on in their old age? That's not really a direct comparison. Lichtenstein was a struggling artist who made good (and that's an understatement), and I've never read anything indicating that he gave a second thought to the artists who supplied him with the "found objects" that made his fortune. (Mort Walker's story about Lichtenstein meeting strip cartoonists is all well and good, but those weren't the guys whose works he'd copied, so they didn't have much reason to be upset.)

 

Norman Felchle

Personally, the Mort Walker story makes me wince. Lichtenstein may have been a genial guy and likeable....but how much can be excused by "he's just making a living, like us" I think it's interesting he didn't defend his work using any of Arlen's arguments. Was he being disingenuous here...or later? I'm tempted to believe this story. He may have been clever enough to find/sell a deeper concept behind the work....and it may have even become true in time. But he was just a guy like other guys. He had strong points...and weaknesses.

 

Andrew Farago

M.C. Hammer sold hundreds of thousands of records in the early 1990s on the strength of sampling Rick James's song Superfreak, but he didn't give him proper credit, got sued, and lost millions of dollars in the process. The Verve used an obscure symphonic version of The Rolling Stones' Sympathy for the Devil in their massive hit Bittersweet Symphony, but they didn't give proper credit, got sued, and basically lost all their earnings for that album. I guess the fact that publishers didn't see this as copyright infringement and didn't pursue any claims against Lichtenstein puts him legally in the clear, and the artists whose works he referenced didn't go after him either...but I can't get over the fact that he, an artist himself, didn't treat the comic books he copied as anything other than found objects. Cutting checks to Russ Heath, William Overgard, John Romita, et al. would've gone a long way toward getting rid of the animosity that cartoonists have toward him and his work today.

 

Norman Felchle

Yeah...artists have to trade in what we've got. Our ideas and our work. When someone takes it , it hurts. It feels like cheating. It smacks of dishonesty. I feel the same way when I see James Cameron take Roger Dean's work and make a bazillion dollars with Avatar. I hope he quietly gave him a little something ....but, I doubt it.

 

Norman Felchle

I'll also admit we all look at other artists and get inspired....or maybe even cross the line into swiping. It's not like Lichtenstein was a lone villian in a world of pure creative souls.....but still, fair's fair.....isn't it?

 

David Chelsea

We live in a more litigious age than Lichtenstein did. If Lichtenstein tried to build a career today from reworked comics panels he'd be hearing from Russ Heath or Jack Kirby's lawyers, if Shepard Fairey's experience is any guide.

 

Norman Felchle

David....I'm afraid he'd have been hearing from Marvel/Disney's lawyers. I doubt Kirby would've seen a thing from it.

 

Arlen Schumer

Hey Rick (and Robert P, if you weren't joking)--if you think you're above me...b'low me!

 

Arlen Schumer

And Rick, try directing your misplaced "fuck off" anger not at Lichtenstein (or me), but at the comic book companies themselves for not taking better financial care of their own, who sweated blood and tears for them. Why don't you write an open letter to DC and Marvel, for example, and tell them THEY should "fuck off" for not taking care of guys like Russ Heath that Andrew mentioned, since it obviously upsets you so much? I DARE YOU, Mr. Tough Guy!

 

Arlen Schumer

Rick Stromoski=Paper Tiger!

 

Pete Harrison

Roy transformed clip art into something to be hung on a wall. Given the decade, it worked and was original & refreshing; the use of benday dots on canvas was pretty clever. HOWEVER, I do appreciate David's research that lets us all know the artist that originally did the artwork.

 

Bitt Faulk

Arlen: Pop art was about using pop culture iconography in high art. There is seldom anything iconographic about the images that RL stole (with some notable exceptions). They are quite clearly incompetent reproductions. Had RL decided that the iconographic element of comics was the outline/contour-line style, the flat shading, the word balloons, and the technical printing artifacts like halftoning, he could have made some really interesting "ART", putting those elements in the context of high art. Reproducing classic art pieces in that style, for example, while not exactly a mind-boggling premise, would have shown us that he at least had the idea that there were *ideas* worth exploring. As it is, though, all he did was reproduce existing images while often destroying many of the iconographic details that are supposed to be the hallmark of pop art, like mutilating the calligraphy to the point where it's no longer recognizable as comics lettering, removing differences in line thickness, etc.

 

A smug tedium reigns as Lichtenstein moves in at the Tate Modern and the artefacts of Pompeii and Herculaneum receive yet another airing at the British Museum. But at least George Bellows' arrival at the Royal Academy is something to salute.

 

A meanness of spirit made manifest by an intellectually benumbed public, quick to delight their under-developed palates for reasons they cannot articulate, has become the enemy of art.

- Jason Holmes 18/04/2013

 

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

Recent times

Borrowed element

Recontextualization

 

DECONSTRUCTING ROY LICHTENSTEIN

BEFORE AND AFTER

 

BRADSHAW CRANDELL

Navy Girl

circa 1940's

 

ROY LICHTENSTEIN

Mr. Bellamy 1961

Original Artist : Mel Keefer

 

It would seem that Lichtenstein was even less original than many of his existing detractors had thought.

 

Although Lichtenstein had been using comic book imagery in his paintings since 1957, he did not do large canvases reproducing single comic strip panels featuring speech balloons until he painted Look Mickey in the summer of 1961 - four months after he had, by his own admission, seen Warhol's canvases. Warhol had been painting single comic strip panels featuring speech balloons since 1960 - a year earlier than Lichtenstein. It is possible that Lichtenstein, as Warhol suspected, had seen Warhol's paintings at Bonwit Teller, although Lichtenstein never mentioned it in interviews. In any case, Lichtenstein admitted having seen Warhol's cartoon paintings prior to doing his own single panel comic strip paintings featuring speech balloons (Look Mickey).

 

www.warholstars.org/warhol1/11roylichtenstein.html

 

Bradshaw Crandell (June 14, 1896 – January 25, 1966) was an American artist and illustrator. He was known as the "artist of the stars". Among those who posed for Crandell were Carol Lombard, Bette Davis, Judy Garland, Veronica Lake and Lana Turner. In 1921 he began his career with an ad for Lorraine hair nets sold exclusively by F. W. Woolworth. His first cover illustration was the May 28, 1921 issue for the humor magazine Judge. In later life he went from illustrations to oil-on-canvas paintings which included political figures. He also provided poster work for 20th Century Fox. In 2006 he was inducted into the Society of Illustrators hall of fame. In March 2010, an illustration for the 1952 Dutch Treat Club yearbook of Crandell's sold for $17,000.

 

John Bradshaw Crandell was born in Glens Falls, New York in 1896, son of Hubert Lee and Vira (Mills) Crandell. Hubert's grandfather, born Peter Crandall, thought "the better way to spell the last name was Crandell instead of the original spelling used by the immigrant ancestor, Elder John Crandall.

 

Crandell attended classes at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago but did not graduate. Instead he enrolled in Wesleyan University and again did not graduate. His 1918 World War I draft registration card noted he was a student. The twelfth general catalog of the Psi Upsilon fraternity lists him under the Xi Chapter for the year 1919 (from Wesleyan).

 

Crandall's career took off in 1921 with a contract for the cover of Judge magazine. Although he began his business as John Bradshaw Crandell Studios in 1925, he dropped his first name by 1935. He was known as a "glamour" artist and not necessarily a "pin-up" artist; however, he did have rather risque work, such as the two nude water nymphs and a nude cover for the Dutch Treat Club. In the 1950s, Crandall moved from illustrations to oil and portraits.

 

Some of Crandell's work is on display in Vanderbilt Hall, a mansion hotel in Newport, Rhode Island owned by Peter de Savary. Phyllis Brown often graced the covers of Cosmopolitan and she was a well sought after model. An incident is told that Gerald Ford suggested the future Mrs. Betty Ford meet with two of his favorite friends when he heard of a trip she made to New York. Those friends being Mr. and Mrs. Bradshaw Crandell; however, when Phyllis arrived or as the future first lady put it later "In she slinked, Jerry's model" (Jerry had dated Phyllis) in a low cut very revealing outfit and then had the audacity to steal her escort. Both Crandell and Ford were innocent of any wrongdoing, though, as Phyllis admitted it was all her idea.

  

Arlen Schumer

How's this, Bitt? Roy Lichtenstein's work is the VERY DEFINITION of pop art itself: the idea that everyday objects and motifs/ideas/forms from our commercial and popular culture environment could be legitimate areas of artistic study and exploration as valid as the more traditional ones of the "natural" world (landscapes and still lifes) and the inner imagination (abstract expressionism). Lichtenstein chose the world of comic art for his particular pop art, and produced a body of work that turned out to be his life's work. Through his artistic transformation of his "found" art subject matter (what Pop shared with the Dadaist/surrealists like Duchamp)--not the pejorative of "tracing comic panels," "ripping them off," etc.--Lichtenstein explored many of the most classic artistic subjects of culture, society, relationships, image, identity, perception--and art itself, in a complete turning inside-out of the art-imitates-life-imitates-art moebius strip that both confounded and won over art critics, and is the source of a kind of humor in his work.

 

Arlen Schumer

Guess you took your football and went home, Bitt Faulk?

 

Bitt Faulk

No, Arlen; I have a job. I still fail to see how reproducing comics panels "explores ... culture, society, relationships, image, identity, perception" any more than the original did. And, personally, I find art that comments on art (with no other element) to be pretentious and masturbatory. But at least you expressed a reason. Actually, I have a question: what if instead of redrawing the panels, he actually just photographically enlarged the images and proclaimed them to be art? Would that have accomplished the same goal? If not, what (other) creative aspects did he add that elevated the images?

 

Arlen Schumer

But Bitt, the original panels did NOT "explore... culture, society, relationships, image, identity, perception"--they were incidental panels in average-to-mediocre disposable comics of the time. RL, by CHANGING THEIR ENTIRE CONTEXT (a concept which you & all RL haters still fail to acknowledge and/or grasp), thru the act of graphically redesigning/painting them (not just straight tracings, as again, RL haters are quick to assume) and placing them in a fine art/gallery/museum context, does indeed give them NEW meaning, and changes their ORIGINAL "meaning" (as if they even had any, beyond the confines of the average-to-mediocre stories they were from). And who knows, if he had made large photo blowups of them like you suggest, he might've achieved the same results (had the photo technology been then what it is now)? Because isn't that what Duchamp achieved with his found art/"ready-mades"? Unless you want to discredit Duchamp as well?

 

Bitt Faulk

I think the most telling part of your response is "who knows". That says to me that you're judging the art on the say-so of the art community, not on its own merit. But it sounds like you're leaning towards the idea that an exact reproduction hanging in a museum would be as worthy. Which implies that the only thing that RL contributed was the recontextualization. And, as you point out, Duchamp did that at least 45 years earlier.

 

Arlen Schumer

Love how you sidestep my ENTIRE response to you, and focus on the "who knows" part of it, which was your OWN "who knows" in the first place! I'M the one "leaning towards the idea"?!?! No, Bitt, it's YOUR idea--I was just responding to it hypothetically, not endorsing it, but nonetheless giving it plausibility. And your only response is to say "Duchamp did it 45 years ago'? So what? EVERYTHING in art history has been "done before," and influences artists who follow--from developing perspective to impressionism, artists continually add to, revise, do their own interpretations of core ideas and principles, as the "found art/ready-mades" of Duchamp are considered, along with Dad and surrealism, as the forerunners/influencers of pop art itself. Try actually engaging what I say next time, Bitt, and not foisting your ideas and words into my mouth, OK!

 

Bitt Faulk

Okay, let me be explicit. Just because you say something is so does not make it so. You cannot claim that a cartoon image of a fighter pilot shooting down a plane has no meaning in one context and does in another without a REASON. You can't just throw art major buzzwords around and pretend that they're a real argument. I didn't respond to the rest of your post because it just repeated the same nothing you've already stated half a dozen times. And, in my opinion, if you're going to produce "clever" art, you have to do or say something original. If you don't, you're just copying. I have yet to see any originality in any of RL's work. The images are obviously taken from somewhere else, and the "clever"ness employed isn't new, either.

 

Bitt Faulk

My browser went wacky on that last post. Let me clarify a few points. The only recontextualization that RL performed was taking art that was already enjoyed by one group of people (generally considered to be lower-class or children) and put it in front of another group of people (generally considered to be higher-class). Duchamp, Warhol, etc. took objects and images that were generally not considered to be art at all and presented them as high art. RL took art and presented it as art. What a concept. Then again, Duchamp produced a defaced poor copy of the Mona Lisa and called it art, too. At least he had the insight to make a crude pun.

 

Arlen Schumer

Bitt: once AGAIN you put YOUR words in MY mouth when you wrote this: "You cannot claim that a cartoon image of a fighter pilot shooting down a plane has no meaning in one context and does in another without a REASON." i NEVER SAID they had "no meaning"; reread my post, because I shouldn't have to requote myself to you. And why even BOTHER debating/discussing/arguing with you, when you condescend with this whopper of yours: "You can't just throw art major buzzwords around and pretend that they're a real argument." Really, Bitt? Please quote where I do that, because I'm all ears!

 

Arlen Schumer

Might as well finish hoisting you on your own petard before I wait for your response to my last post; you conclude with " RL took art and presented it as art. What a concept." Actually, yeah, that IS the concept. You say Duchamp presented non-art objects as high art, yes. RL's (and Pop Art in general's) achievement was indeed, presenting commercial "art"--i.e., "low" art (with its "low" meaning--the literal formula stories they were all from)--as "high art"--ergo the built-in pun to the phrase "Pop Art" itself! When you discount RL, as most comics fans do, you discount ALL of Pop Art in general.

 

Bitt Faulk

To be fair, I think the vast majority of pop art is absolute crap. I don't think it says anything. At all. It's not inventive, and it's not half as clever as it thinks it is. If you like it, that's great. But at least most of it has some uniqueness to it, from asking the viewer to rethink the artistry of the source material to making a comment on commercialism, etc., and I can appreciate that intellectually while still disliking it. But there's simply none of that in RL's work. (Actually, I kind of like some of his abstract work.) But I still fail to see you explaining what makes RL's work more than just a copy of existing art. You keep saying that the reason is recontextualization, but what about that is interesting? My argument is "nothing". Your argument apparently doesn't exist at all. I've given you a lot of time to make your case, and you have failed to do so. But, at this point, I'm going to have to suggest, Arlen, that you get out your checkbook; I'm about to make some high art. I'm recontextualizing you into my ignore file.

 

Bitt Faulk

Sorry, everyone else, for that extended load of crap. I really wanted him to provide some sort of explanation, but it's clear to me now that he simply doesn't have one.

 

Arlen Schumer

Guess Bitt finally DID take his football and run home! Here's his last post, from my e-mail feed: "To be fair, I think the vast majority of pop art is absolute crap. I don't think it says anything. At all. It's not inventive, and it's not half as clever as it thinks it is. If you like it, that's great. But at least most of it has some uniqueness to it, from asking the viewer to rethink the artistry of the source material to making a comment on commercialism, etc., and I can appreciate that intellectually while still disliking it. But there's simply none of that in RL's work. (Actually, I kind of like some of his abstract work.) But I still fail to see you explaining what makes RL's work more than just a copy of existing art. You keep saying that the reason is recontextualization, but what about that is interesting? My argument is "nothing". Your argument apparently doesn't exist at all. I've given you a lot of time to make your case, and you have failed to do so. But, at this point, I'm going to have to suggest, Arlen, that you get out your checkbook; I'm about to make some high art. I'm recontextualizing you into my ignore file." Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out, Bitty!

 

Tom Orzechowski

It's why I de-friended him some time ago. He may have become familiar with RL before ever seeing a comic book, and thus has his context backwards. You're a gentleman for taking it as far as you did.

 

www.stumbleupon.com/su/76LXAG/davidbarsalou.homestead.com...

 

From:

novopren1

Subject:

arthur peddy

 

Hi:

Do you know in which comic is the source image of Lichtensteins nurse originally drawn bt arthur peddy?

thanks and really like your work

Agustin

 

From:

Margaret in St. Stephen, New Brunswick

 

Subject:

 

photos of Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel for book project

 

Hello David,

 

I am working on a book for Canada Post and one of the subjects is Superman and the creative team of Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel. Do you know a good source of archival images of the pair? I will need hi-res and copyright permission and most websites simply reproduce lo-res, uncredited images, which are of no use for a book project.

 

The book is in the design stage so it would be much appreciated if you could reply as soon as possible. Thanks!

 

Margaret Williamson

Photography Consultant

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

613-744-1014

margaretwilliamson@rogers.com

 

Simon Patterson

Subject:

 

Original Sources

Dear David,

 

I'm a rare bookseller based in the UK. I figured that the original Lichtenstein sources might make a good collection for a client - I hadn't realised it was so widespread until looking at your Flickr! Do you know of any lists of the sources, or is this something you've put together?

 

Thanks,

Simon Patterson

simon@hyraxia.com

 

jonbcooke

Subject:

 

COMIC BOOK CREATOR magazine

 

Hi, David!

 

My name is Jon B. Cooke and I edit the magazine COMIC BOOK CREATOR. I am currently compiling an issue devoted to the artist Russ Heath and am writing to ask if you might have high-resolution color images to share for inclusion in the issue. I'm also eager to include comparisons of Heath's work to the paintings of Roy Lictenstein and would love to discuss with you. I look forward to your reply and many thanks for your consideration.

 

Eileen Doyle

Subject:

 

Lichtenstein Masterpiece source

Hello David,

 

I am hoping that you can help me locate a high resolution image of the source image by Ted Galindo for Roy Lichtenstein's "Masterpiece." Could you provide the information about that image (comic title, date, copyright holder) so that I can license it?

 

Thank you,

 

Eileen Doyle

The Marsted Curatorial Fellow for Contemporary Art

Wadsworth Atheneum Museum of Art

 

Sara

Subject:

 

Asking permission

Hi David,

 

May I use your picture www.flickr.com/photos/deconstructing-roy-lichtenstein/458... to illustrate a blog post inviting readers to check your gallery and to reflect on how original are -or not- Lichtenstein comic paintings?

 

Thanks,

Sara

Hello World! or: How I Learned to Stop Listening and Love the Noise (2008) stitches more than 5000 video diaries gathered from MySpace, YouTube, and Facebook into a massive, panoramic crowd of individual talking heads. It is simultaneously a critical look at the growing cacophony of participatory media and an optimistic meditation on its democratizing potential.

 

Each video diary consists of a single speaker candidly addressing an imagined, potentially massive audience from a private space such as a bedroom, kitchen, or dorm room. The individual monologues are mundane–records of daily activities, opinions, feelings, and frustrations–but together they reveal a fascinating patchwork of life lived online.

 

Artist Christopher Baker, originally trained as a scientist, examines the complex relationship between society and its technologies by recontextualizing captured communications and visualizing large sets of data. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Art and Technology Studies department at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

REFF, FakePress, AOS and Ossigeno

present

 

REFF on tour

Ancona, Osimo, Macerata

 

REFF on tour

 

REFF on tour

 

30-31 marzo 2011

 

Just back from London REFF, the fake institution promoting from 2009 cultural policies, artworks and technologied inspired to the systhematic reinvention of reality, will arrive in Marche (Italy)

 

Thanks to the collaboration of Ossigeno, REFF A/R Youth Program, the special program in Education & Learning dedicated to yung gneration, will be presented in public shool, Academias and Universities of Ancona, Osimo and Macerata cities.

 

Everyones – students, professors, citizens – will have the possibility to experiment the extraordinary effects of REFF AR Drugs, the augmented reality drug recently lunched by the fake institution.

 

REFF – Remix the World! Reinvent Reality!

 

Program of activities

 

30th March 2011 , 10,40am – Aula Magna

Liceo Artistico Mannucci “E. Mannucci” – Ancona

 

Introduction by Prof. Francesco Colonnelli

 

30th March 2011 – 17.30pm

Libreria Il mercante di Storie – Osimo (AN)

 

31th March 2011 – 10am – Aula Magna

Accademia di Belle Arti Macerata – Macerata (http://www2.abamc.it/)

Introduction by Prof. Antonio G. Benemia

 

More info on:

www.romaeuropa.org

www.fakepress.it

www.artisopensource.net

www.ossigenazioni.com

 

ABOUT REFF AR YOUTH PROGRAM

 

REFF AR Youth Program is a special program of Education & Learning enacted by REFF to ensure the immediate distribution of REFF AR Drug to young generations.The Program consists in a series of theoretical and practical workshops exploring the possibilities offered by fake, remix, recontextualization, plagiarism and reenactment as a tool for methodological reinvention of reality.

 

REFF AR Youth Program was lunched in London as a part of the exhibit “Remix the World! Reinvent reality!” (Fourtherfield Gallery, 25th Feb – 26th Mar 2011). The agenda of the Fake Institution inspired approval and enthusiasm in the academic world. Six different universities in London already guested REFF workshops and presentations.

 

Learn mere here:

 

ABOUT REFF AR Drugs

 

From the information sheet:

 

“REFF is an Augmented Reality (AR) Drug. Also referred to as Simulata Realitas per Activam-Industriosam-Laboriosam Multiplicationem, REFF AR Drug is a psychotropic antidepressant administered cross-medially.This drug is used to treat social depression, fear of the future, precariety, anthropological distress, lack of opportunities, communicational totalitarianism, scarcity of freedoms and intolerant social ecosystems.Compared to other drugs acting on the same areas, REFF AR Drug is designed with accessibility in mind and as an enabler of the spontaneous generation of forms of expression and of collaborative practices.

 

REFF AR Drug is also used (off-label) to treat numerous other conditions such as the UFPS (Uncertainty for the Future of Publishing Syndrome), and the LDSBMS (Lack of Decent Sustainable Business Models Syndrome).”

 

Learn more here:

 

www.fakepress.it/FP/?p=1640

 

ABOUT REFF – RomaEuropa FakeFactory

 

REFF is a fake cultural institution enacting real policies for arts, creativity and freedoms of expression all over the world.

 

REFF was born in Italy in 2009. Since then it continuously operated using fake, remix, reinvention, recontextualization, plagiarism and reenactment as tools for the systematic reinvention of reality. Defining what is real is an act of power. Being able to reinvent reality is an act of freedom. REFF promotes the dissemination and reappropriation of all technologies, theories and practices that can be used to freely and autonomously reinvent reality.

 

To do this, REFF established an international competition on digital arts, a worldwide education program in which ubiquitous technologies are used to create additional layers of reality for critical practices and freedoms, a series of open source software platforms and an Augmented Reality Drug.

 

REFF collaborates with art organizations, student groups, research institutions and all other subjects wishing to promote the freedoms to reinvent their world. REFF has received several official recognitions worldwide: it was hosted in the Cultural Commission of the Italian Senate, and was an official initiative of the European Community’s Year of Creativity in 2009.

 

Official site:

 

www.romaeuropa.org

 

REFF in the world:

 

reff.romaeuropa.org

 

Photos by Marco Fagotti and Giacomo Cesari

REFF, FakePress, AOS and Ossigeno

present

 

REFF on tour

Ancona, Osimo, Macerata

 

REFF on tour

 

REFF on tour

 

30-31 marzo 2011

 

Just back from London REFF, the fake institution promoting from 2009 cultural policies, artworks and technologied inspired to the systhematic reinvention of reality, will arrive in Marche (Italy)

 

Thanks to the collaboration of Ossigeno, REFF A/R Youth Program, the special program in Education & Learning dedicated to yung gneration, will be presented in public shool, Academias and Universities of Ancona, Osimo and Macerata cities.

 

Everyones – students, professors, citizens – will have the possibility to experiment the extraordinary effects of REFF AR Drugs, the augmented reality drug recently lunched by the fake institution.

 

REFF – Remix the World! Reinvent Reality!

 

Program of activities

 

30th March 2011 , 10,40am – Aula Magna

Liceo Artistico Mannucci “E. Mannucci” – Ancona

 

Introduction by Prof. Francesco Colonnelli

 

30th March 2011 – 17.30pm

Libreria Il mercante di Storie – Osimo (AN)

 

31th March 2011 – 10am – Aula Magna

Accademia di Belle Arti Macerata – Macerata (http://www2.abamc.it/)

Introduction by Prof. Antonio G. Benemia

 

More info on:

www.romaeuropa.org

www.fakepress.it

www.artisopensource.net

www.ossigenazioni.com

 

ABOUT REFF AR YOUTH PROGRAM

 

REFF AR Youth Program is a special program of Education & Learning enacted by REFF to ensure the immediate distribution of REFF AR Drug to young generations.The Program consists in a series of theoretical and practical workshops exploring the possibilities offered by fake, remix, recontextualization, plagiarism and reenactment as a tool for methodological reinvention of reality.

 

REFF AR Youth Program was lunched in London as a part of the exhibit “Remix the World! Reinvent reality!” (Fourtherfield Gallery, 25th Feb – 26th Mar 2011). The agenda of the Fake Institution inspired approval and enthusiasm in the academic world. Six different universities in London already guested REFF workshops and presentations.

 

Learn mere here:

 

ABOUT REFF AR Drugs

 

From the information sheet:

 

“REFF is an Augmented Reality (AR) Drug. Also referred to as Simulata Realitas per Activam-Industriosam-Laboriosam Multiplicationem, REFF AR Drug is a psychotropic antidepressant administered cross-medially.This drug is used to treat social depression, fear of the future, precariety, anthropological distress, lack of opportunities, communicational totalitarianism, scarcity of freedoms and intolerant social ecosystems.Compared to other drugs acting on the same areas, REFF AR Drug is designed with accessibility in mind and as an enabler of the spontaneous generation of forms of expression and of collaborative practices.

 

REFF AR Drug is also used (off-label) to treat numerous other conditions such as the UFPS (Uncertainty for the Future of Publishing Syndrome), and the LDSBMS (Lack of Decent Sustainable Business Models Syndrome).”

 

Learn more here:

 

www.fakepress.it/FP/?p=1640

 

ABOUT REFF – RomaEuropa FakeFactory

 

REFF is a fake cultural institution enacting real policies for arts, creativity and freedoms of expression all over the world.

 

REFF was born in Italy in 2009. Since then it continuously operated using fake, remix, reinvention, recontextualization, plagiarism and reenactment as tools for the systematic reinvention of reality. Defining what is real is an act of power. Being able to reinvent reality is an act of freedom. REFF promotes the dissemination and reappropriation of all technologies, theories and practices that can be used to freely and autonomously reinvent reality.

 

To do this, REFF established an international competition on digital arts, a worldwide education program in which ubiquitous technologies are used to create additional layers of reality for critical practices and freedoms, a series of open source software platforms and an Augmented Reality Drug.

 

REFF collaborates with art organizations, student groups, research institutions and all other subjects wishing to promote the freedoms to reinvent their world. REFF has received several official recognitions worldwide: it was hosted in the Cultural Commission of the Italian Senate, and was an official initiative of the European Community’s Year of Creativity in 2009.

 

Official site:

 

www.romaeuropa.org

 

REFF in the world:

 

reff.romaeuropa.org

 

Photos by Marco Fagotti and Giacomo Cesari

The "Homoglyph" series involves clipping bodies out of screenshots of gay dating app profile pictures and recontextualizing them to emphasize the semiotics of the selfie. Bodies paired with specific motifs juxtapose classical and contemporary notions of gender expression while challenging the relationship between contemporary masculinity and self-objectification. Here, the profile photo is viewed as a contemporary hieroglyph meant to communicate specific sexual messages informed by hegemonic values and mainstream media. Likewise, the stolen images address the inherent conflicts of the conflation of private and public life.

 

www.jaysonedwardcarter.com

@jaysonedwardcarter

REFF, FakePress, AOS and Ossigeno

present

 

REFF on tour

Ancona, Osimo, Macerata

 

REFF on tour

 

REFF on tour

 

30-31 marzo 2011

 

Just back from London REFF, the fake institution promoting from 2009 cultural policies, artworks and technologied inspired to the systhematic reinvention of reality, will arrive in Marche (Italy)

 

Thanks to the collaboration of Ossigeno, REFF A/R Youth Program, the special program in Education & Learning dedicated to yung gneration, will be presented in public shool, Academias and Universities of Ancona, Osimo and Macerata cities.

 

Everyones – students, professors, citizens – will have the possibility to experiment the extraordinary effects of REFF AR Drugs, the augmented reality drug recently lunched by the fake institution.

 

REFF – Remix the World! Reinvent Reality!

 

Program of activities

 

30th March 2011 , 10,40am – Aula Magna

Liceo Artistico Mannucci “E. Mannucci” – Ancona

 

Introduction by Prof. Francesco Colonnelli

 

30th March 2011 – 17.30pm

Libreria Il mercante di Storie – Osimo (AN)

 

31th March 2011 – 10am – Aula Magna

Accademia di Belle Arti Macerata – Macerata (http://www2.abamc.it/)

Introduction by Prof. Antonio G. Benemia

 

More info on:

www.romaeuropa.org

www.fakepress.it

www.artisopensource.net

www.ossigenazioni.com

 

ABOUT REFF AR YOUTH PROGRAM

 

REFF AR Youth Program is a special program of Education & Learning enacted by REFF to ensure the immediate distribution of REFF AR Drug to young generations.The Program consists in a series of theoretical and practical workshops exploring the possibilities offered by fake, remix, recontextualization, plagiarism and reenactment as a tool for methodological reinvention of reality.

 

REFF AR Youth Program was lunched in London as a part of the exhibit “Remix the World! Reinvent reality!” (Fourtherfield Gallery, 25th Feb – 26th Mar 2011). The agenda of the Fake Institution inspired approval and enthusiasm in the academic world. Six different universities in London already guested REFF workshops and presentations.

 

Learn mere here:

 

ABOUT REFF AR Drugs

 

From the information sheet:

 

“REFF is an Augmented Reality (AR) Drug. Also referred to as Simulata Realitas per Activam-Industriosam-Laboriosam Multiplicationem, REFF AR Drug is a psychotropic antidepressant administered cross-medially.This drug is used to treat social depression, fear of the future, precariety, anthropological distress, lack of opportunities, communicational totalitarianism, scarcity of freedoms and intolerant social ecosystems.Compared to other drugs acting on the same areas, REFF AR Drug is designed with accessibility in mind and as an enabler of the spontaneous generation of forms of expression and of collaborative practices.

 

REFF AR Drug is also used (off-label) to treat numerous other conditions such as the UFPS (Uncertainty for the Future of Publishing Syndrome), and the LDSBMS (Lack of Decent Sustainable Business Models Syndrome).”

 

Learn more here:

 

www.fakepress.it/FP/?p=1640

 

ABOUT REFF – RomaEuropa FakeFactory

 

REFF is a fake cultural institution enacting real policies for arts, creativity and freedoms of expression all over the world.

 

REFF was born in Italy in 2009. Since then it continuously operated using fake, remix, reinvention, recontextualization, plagiarism and reenactment as tools for the systematic reinvention of reality. Defining what is real is an act of power. Being able to reinvent reality is an act of freedom. REFF promotes the dissemination and reappropriation of all technologies, theories and practices that can be used to freely and autonomously reinvent reality.

 

To do this, REFF established an international competition on digital arts, a worldwide education program in which ubiquitous technologies are used to create additional layers of reality for critical practices and freedoms, a series of open source software platforms and an Augmented Reality Drug.

 

REFF collaborates with art organizations, student groups, research institutions and all other subjects wishing to promote the freedoms to reinvent their world. REFF has received several official recognitions worldwide: it was hosted in the Cultural Commission of the Italian Senate, and was an official initiative of the European Community’s Year of Creativity in 2009.

 

Official site:

 

www.romaeuropa.org

 

REFF in the world:

 

reff.romaeuropa.org

 

Photos by Marco Fagotti and Giacomo Cesari

ARLEN SCHUMER

May 9, 2012

 

Arlen Schumer

Once again, for all the comic book fans who still don't "get" Roy Lichtenstein--thanx as always to the Lord of Lichtenstein, David Barsalou: www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2012/ma...

 

Henry Martinez Sorry Arlen, I don't get Lichtenstein, and the article didn't help. I will just attribute it to my not seeing his vision.

 

Mark Lerer Roy Lichtenstein Forever! Thanks for posting!

 

Arlen Schumer Delmo, that sounds totally contradictory to me; you say you "like" Roy, which i take to mean you "like" his work--then out of the other corner of your mouth you dismiss it completely, using the same tired, old canards that miss the entire point of his work, that I would've thought by now had been considered passe...

 

Delmo Walters Jr. I'm allowed to be contradictory. You're free to remove my comment if it displeases you.

 

Arlen Schumer geez, are you that sensitive? whatever happened to casual debate\, delmo? why do you think I posted this image & story in the first place? which, by the way, i doubt you've even read, did you? maybe if you read it, your opinion on RL might change...

 

Delmo Walters Jr. Probably not.

 

Arlen Schumer and also, delmo, am I not "allowed to be contradictory" when I post a response to a comment like yours? Geez, people on FB are so touchy the moment some "contradiction" rears its "ugly" head!

 

Delmo Walters Jr. Sure, you're allowed.

 

Arlen Schumer wouldn't it be nice if people actually debated their positions in a good-natured fashion? Or at least that's my goal...

 

Mike Hall Lichtenstein's work is derivative (in the legal sense of the word, not the critical), and that makes it original in its own right. Look at those two images: there are actually quite a few differences. Lichtenstein's doesn't serve the needs of a story; it stands alone as an image that is itself a narrative statement of the power of comic book imagery. I don't think I'd call myself a Lichtenstein fan (I'm familiar with only a few of his pieces), but I get what he was doing, and will continue to defend it as legitimate art.

 

Fred Schiller I wonder how folks would feel about his work if he worked in a bakery by day and painted at night for fun. Maybe he gave away his originals to friends who liked them and he did it for the joy and not the money.

 

Bhob Stewart With "Brushstroke" he out-popped everyone. www.lichtensteinfoundation.org/hirshorn07.htm

 

Rick Stromoski Lichtenstein was a plagiaristic twat

 

Matt Tauber I "get" that he had an interesting idea that he overused. I "get" that he couldn't draw sh*t on his own. I really don't get "Sleeping Girl," though, as Lichtenstein once said his goal was to capture a moment of emotional intensity as a static, technical drawing.

 

Mike Wedmer Roy would recreate the technical process of printing, more than he was ripping off a comic artist. His work looked like giant blown up versions of a panel. All the way down to the telltale dots of early coloring.

Maybe it has more to do with his work, which is comic oriented, being considered legitimate art, when other more skilled Comicers work, is not.

 

Bojan M. Đukić As expected, the imitated comic book art proves to be far superior in every instance compared to the 'artistic treatment' that remains inferior.

 

Arlen Schumer I have one word for all those who still don't get RL: "Context." If you don't know what that means in relation to RL, then you won't get RL. Period. The comments against RL on this thread prove it...sigh!

 

Rick Stromoski So either accept RL as an artistic genius or be a luddite.

 

Arlen Schumer Gee, rick, must you be that extreme? There's no middle ground with you?

 

Arlen Schumer And a "luddite" is anti-technology; what the heck does that have to do with art? Unless you mean a "philistine," which would be more apt.

 

Rick Stromoski I get it Arlen...i just don't happen to agree with your assessment of RL's contribution to art. He's an accidental success. He fell itno this success by accident after failing with conventional attempts. he did this as lark and it took off...to me he's as relevent as Julian Schnabel or Robbie Conal...meaning not very

 

Rick Stromoski meant to say phillistine but wrote luddite in haste...

 

Arlen Schumer Rick, what exactly do you "get"? You can't "get" RL and then totally dismiss his career--that NO art critic in the mid-'60s thought would last btw--with the, by now, tired ol' canards that attempt to pass off RL as some sort of mass-hypnosis that ivory tower "art critics" have successfully performed on all of us! The bottom line is, so many comic artists think all RL did was trace & copy, what you call "accidental," and are still stuck in 1965. GET OVER IT.

 

Bojan M. Đukić ‎'He's an accidental success'.

The Best description of Roy Lichtenstein & his 'art'. EVER. Thank you, Sir.

 

Arlen Schumer Misery loves company.

 

Hilary Barta I was just interviewed for an article on the Lichtenstein show going up at the Art Institute of Chicago. I assumed that the old bias of high and low art would be moot at this point. But the museum does not site the comic book sources, and their explanation is that his art is all about that "context", and they didn't want to distract the public from that at the show. No problem, right? Except that they DO cite his contemporaries in Abstract Impressionism when they believe the artist might be humorously referring to them. So, De Kooning is "worthy" of mention, Romita not so much. This is a bias, plain and simple, perhaps one that they are not even aware of. So it's not only the comics fans that still don't see the larger picture.

 

Rick Stromoski I don't think there's anything to get over Arlen...you can't force people into a false appreciation of something they consider drivel. I happen to like Laurie Anderson...my wife hates her...but at least she didn't make a career out of ripping people off.

 

Arlen Schumer hilary--i'm kinda surprised by what you say, because for the last dozen yrs or so, so many RL shows/books etc. have included his sources, in part, I can only assume, in order to diffuse the still-vehement attacks on the veracity of his work & career. Because once you see what RL worked from, you might understand more what he actually did, and achieved, in terms of art/context/appropriation/found-art/pop art theory and practice.

Arlen Schumer And rick, simply not liking one artist or another for personal taste reasons--but still respecting their art & craft--is very different from thinking their career is "accidental" or a "rip-off," or whatever you're complaining about RL, which, again, are the same insults that've been hurled at him since he began.

 

Mark Badger Love Licthenstein but some battles just ain't worth fighting

 

Hilary Barta Yeah, I was rather surprised myself.

 

Arlen Schumer hilary, i just saw a doc film 6 months ago made by 1 of his former assistants, and sanctioned by the RL estate, that went into some depth about his sources! so yeah, it doesn't make sense what you've told em...

 

Arlen Schumer oh, Robert, don't you know by now I purposely pose polarizing positions in my posts (alliteration!:) in order to foment a lively debate? :) why do you think I posted this RL story in the first place? geez, everyone seems to be so thin-skinned when their positions are challenged or contradicted. Lighten up, everyone!

 

Hilary Barta Who knows, Arlen? Like I say, they may be oblivious to what I describe as bias, or maybe they thought it was no longer necessary. And, to be fair, I previewed the as yet incomplete installation of the show. Anyway, I gotta roll.

 

Arlen Schumer hey Hilary, friend me! always been a fan of your work!

 

Arlen Schumer thanx for friending me, H--FB banned me for 30 days because I "over-friended" in a day!

 

James Romberger I wish I could care about the artists who make up the blue chip 1%er- favorite art of the second half of the last century and the beginning of the current one, but unfortunately, I just can't.

 

Arlen Schumer who does? I can't keep up with all the great artists in comics, much less the fine art world!

 

Michael Dooley For anyone interested in a view of Lichtenstein from someone who's actually read the Guardian piece, see the comments I just posted on Arlen's wall (above).

 

Delmo Walters Jr. www.forbes.com/sites/carolpinchefsky/2012/05/10/forget-li...

 

Arlen Schumer

March 8, 2012 ·

 

KIRBY COVER 1st POP ART USAGE: From David Barsalou's requisite DECONSTRUCTING ROY LICHTENSTEIN site on Flickr: "British artist Richard Hamilton, called by many as the 'Father of Pop Art.' Among Hamilton’s notable accomplishments was designing the cover for the Beatles White Album. Probably his earliest work to command attention was the 1956 collage 'Just What Is It that Makes Today’s Homes So Different, So Appealing?' The collage includes, as one of its elements, a framed 'Young Romance' cover. The cover is by Jack Kirby…."

 

Arlen Schumer

October 24, 2012 ·

These comparisons are absolutely ridiculous; SO WHAT if Roy Lichtenstein was inspired by these inconsequential pieces of commercial (found) art! RL recontextualized them into ART! When will all of you RL critics get your ostritch-like heads out of 1965 sand and wake up and smell the 21st century? Where you've all LOST your Lichtenstein-is-not-an-artist argument?!?!?