When is a Cartoon Not a Cartoon?
By Rob Tornoe | October 23rd, 2009 | PERMALINK
Richard Prince's silkscreen print of an uncredited cartoons (right) recently sold for £150,000 at an art fair in England.
As the UK Professional Cartoonists’ Organization (PCO) points out, it’s always been an uphill struggle for cartoonists to get their work recognized and exhibited in museums and art galleries.
So when another artist makes a print of your cartoon, displays it at an art fair and sells it for £150,000, you can understand how a cartoonist would get upset.
The cartoon in question, an uncredited piece, was used as the basis of a silkscreen print by American artist Richard Prince, and sold at the Frieze Art Fair.
“Mr Prince made his name “rephotographing” existing works,” Royston Robertson posted on The Bloghorn, the PCO’s official blog. “His image, “Untitled (Cowboy)” a photo of a cigarette advert, was the first photo to raise more than $1 million at auction, despite the obvious copyright violation.”
Last week, Wall Street Journal illustrator Noli Novak posted a caricature of Barack Obama she drew being co-opted and displayed by another artist under the guise of appropriation.
With staff and freelance cartoonist jobs shrinking as the economy remans stagnant, many cartoonists are rightfully angered and afraid of what the future holds in terms of the ownership of their original work.
“Unfortunately with the ‘Orphan Works’ act, which most countries are trying to push through, there will be more and more cartoonists and illustrators open to exploitation,” said English cartoonist Ian Ellery.
Comments: 2. ADD A COMMENT. |
|
Comments
Comment from Donna Barstow
Time October 24, 2009 at 7:10 pm
INFURIATING!!!!!!
No, most countries are NOT pushing through the Orphan’s Act, Ian. GOOGLE is pushing it through, and most of Europe is resisting. It’s the Authors Guild who is pushing it in US. Along with blind people. I write about how very evil Google is here. http://opedcartoons.com/2009/1.....-creators/
Yeah, this is exactly like the WSJ artist getting ripped off. Both of these copycat “artists”, who work through galleries - no one would publish them alone - just xerox the copyrighted drawing and blow it up to put on canvas or silkscreen. Funny, years ago a fine art artist I know who sells in lots of galleries told me to do the same thing with my own cartoons, literally. Is this a secret scam in galleries, blow things up and call it art?
It’s hard to see these photos, but I just noticed the a-hole Prince removed the caption and made up some non-sequitors. Oh, is this why it’s “different?” No. 1, it’s not art, it’s a product, and #2, he’s still stealing the entire image. We know this because without the image, it’s just words. At least that would have been an honest heap of words.
Comment from James Miller
Time October 24, 2009 at 8:16 am
This only fits in with all the other theft going on in the US right now. “When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it.” - Frederic Bastiat
The US really needs to wake up and smell the BS before it’s too late.