skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Temptation, 2010. Copper, sterling silver, plug adapter.
Wow, Thursday's post about the subject of copying struck some nerves, I knew it was a hot issue but was unaware of the depth of anger involved for some - emails and comments were flying! Those of us who wrote on the topic all agreed that intentionally reproducing another artist's work and calling it your own is wrong, while some of us disagreed about what defines truly innovative work. For me this is the real heart of the issue, what characterizes new and original work, or more exactly, new and original ideas.
While I have certainly said things like, "it's all been done before", the truth is that I do believe there's room for innovation in art, but it is extremely rare. Picasso, da Vinci, Duchamp kind of rare. Truly original work involves big ideas, not small ones. It is not defined by a particular composition, style, technique, or the use of a new material. Truly new ideas influence other artists and lead to major art movements, they are about seeing and presenting art in an entirely new way. I do think there's more room for innovation in conceptual art than other genres, as it is a mere zygote in a chronology that spans thousands of years. Innovation in wearable jewelry made for adornment? I don't think it's very likely, I've certainly never seen it.
Press On, 2001. Artificial Fingernails, Cotton, coral, steel cable, purse frame.
My approach to this issue is pretty academic and established, and plenty of artists are turned off by academia and "academic artspeak". While I agree that the art education system can be lofty and elitist, I also think it plays a very important role. While earning my MFA I learned to look at, think about, and discuss art differently. "Artspeak" is a dialect, and as such can be a very effective and efficient tool for communication. Like anything else it can also be bullshit.
At any rate, as you discuss and critique art from different time periods and genres using this language, you become acutely aware of the recurring ideas, motifs, aesthetic choices, materials, etc. that span centuries and cultures across the globe. My experiences working in the Education Dept. at the Memphis Brooks Museum of Art reinforced my views, it was my extreme pleasure to work among and study artworks beginning with the Ancient Greek and Roman periods through New Media. In my opinion the Decorative Arts demonstrate the least amount of innovation through the ages.
Untitled, 2006. More than 2000 paper clips, pine, steel wire, acrylic paint.
None of this is to say that an artist can't have a unique style or voice, or forge new territories in terms of techniques and material use. For me these things are too small and narrow to qualify as true innovation and originality in the face of all of the art that millions of people have produced over centuries. Sure, I'd like to think I'm the only person who's made fingernail purses and paper clip sculpture based on basketry techniques, but I doubt it, and for me to state such a thing would be hubris.
So there you have it. Let the emails fly.
Today I used sterling silver to make the ring that I designed in SketchUp yesterday.
Today some members of the Handmade Division are talking about the question, "How do you view the topic of copying?". This has certainly been a hot one lately, both Metalsmith and Jewelry Artist magazines have recently published related articles, and it's pretty well saturated the virtual craft community.
I believe that art is derivative by it's very nature, it comes from the human mind and spirit and therefore artists often have similar ideas - sometimes simultaneously, and sometimes separated by hundreds or thousands of years. Art builds on itself over time because artists are inspired by art and one another and this eventually leads to major art movements.
Of course intentional copying happens as well, and to keep this short I'll define a copy as a near to exact replica of an object, not a piece made in a similar manner or style.
If you're a person who consciously copies the work of another to call your own, then you're a fraud and you already know this about yourself. No one likes a copycat, and no one should be a copycat. On the other hand, if your work has been copied and you spend valuable studio time contemplating and complaining about it (been there), you could be missing out on creating your next big work. Keep moving forward.
If your art/craft is your business and you are losing money as a result of someone ripping off your designs, that's clearly a problem that should be addressed. But so often the issue seems to be one of ego, of an artist wanting full credit and recognition for having had the idea first. Completely original and innovative ideas are painfully few and far between when it comes to art, most of us will not have one in our entire lifetime. Lets get over ourselves and focus on making great work.
*4/16/10. A friend sent me a link to this wonderfully written, insightful post from Michael deMeng about art and the sharing of ideas. I love his positive, supportive, and embracing attitude, I bet he's a great teacher.
*4/18/10. Wow, this has caused quite a stir! I have written another post on the nature of original and innovative artwork.
Please visit these other network members to read their ideas on this topic:
ArtJewel Designs
Andes Cruz
Jewelry by Natsuko
Beth Cyr
Tosca Teran
Tamra Gentry
Mary Spencer
Susan Moloney
Rosy Revolver
Still playing with Google Sketchup.
*edited - I made a version of this ring in sterling silver on 4/15/10, you can see more pictures here.
Temptation, 2010. Copper, sterling silver, plug adapter. 
Untitled, 2006. More than 2000 paper clips, pine, steel wire, acrylic paint.
Posts
