|
Thursday, 13 April 2017
quote [ The sculptor Arturo Di Modica said Wall Street’s bronze girl, meant to symbolize female empowerment, distorts the meaning of his work. ]
|
dolemite said @ 5:22am GMT on 13th April
The artistic merits of the girl statue and the intent of its creators are irrelevant to my point, as are the comparative artistic merits of Di Modica's bull. We could argue our respective interpretations of what legitimizes works of art, what precludes an advertisement from being art or how bold a statement must be to deserve any place in any argument, but those factors are irrelevant to my original point as well.
Too many artists fail to grasp this abundantly simple point: once you release a piece of art you cannot control how others use it or how others choose to see it. The Copyright Act protects several activities as the exclusive rights of a work's creator and offers legal remedies if those rights are infringed. For every other perceived offense against their creations artists have only one reliable defense. To understand that other people get to express themselves too and to be a grownup when that happens.
Di Modica is whining.
dolemite said @ 5:26am GMT on 13th April
The artistic merits of the girl statue and the intent of its creators are irrelevant to my point, as are the comparative artistic merits of Di Modica's bull. We could argue our respective interpretations of what legitimizes works of art, what precludes an advertisement from being art or how bold a statement must be to deserve any place in any argument, but those factors are irrelevant to my original point as well.
Too many artists fail to grasp this abundantly simple point: once you release a piece of art you cannot control how others use it or how others choose to see it.
The Copyright Act protects several activities as the exclusive rights of a work's creator and offers legal remedies if those rights are infringed. For every other perceived offense against their creations artists have only one reliable defense. To understand that other people get to express themselves too and to be a grownup when that happens.
Di Modica is whining.
dolemite said @ 5:42am GMT on 13th April
You're doing some assuming of your own.
The artistic merits of the girl statue and the intent of its creators are irrelevant to my point, as are the comparative artistic merits of Di Modica's bull.
We could argue our respective interpretations of what legitimizes works of art, what precludes an advertisement from being art or how bold a statement must be to deserve any place in any argument, but those factors are irrelevant to my original point as well.
Too many artists fail to grasp this abundantly simple point: once you release a piece of art you cannot control how others use it or how others choose to see it.
The Copyright Act protects several activities as the exclusive rights of a work's creator and offers legal remedies if those rights are infringed. For every other perceived offense against their creations artists have only one reliable defense. To understand that other people get to express themselves too and to be a grownup when that happens.
Di Modica is whining.
dolemite said @ 5:44am GMT on 13th April
You're doing some assuming of your own.
The artistic merits of the girl statue and the intent of its creators are irrelevant to my point, as are the comparative artistic merits of Di Modica's bull.
We could argue our respective interpretations of what legitimizes works of art, what precludes an advertisement from being art or how bold a statement must be to deserve any place in any argument, but those factors are irrelevant to my original point as well.
Too many artists fail to grasp this abundantly simple point: once you release a piece of art you cannot control how others use it or how others choose to see it.
The Copyright Act protects several activities as the exclusive rights of a work's creator and offers legal remedies if those rights are infringed. For every other perceived offense against their creations artists have only one reliable defense. To accept the unchangeable fact that other people get to express themselves too and to act like a grownup when that happens.
Di Modica is whining.
<-- Entry / Current Comment
dolemite said @ 5:22am GMT on 13th April [Score:2 Underrated]
You're doing some assuming of your own.
The artistic merits of the girl statue and the intent of its creators are irrelevant to my point, as are the comparative artistic merits of Di Modica's bull.
We could argue our respective interpretations of what legitimizes works of art, what precludes an advertisement from being art or how bold a statement must be to deserve any place in any argument, but those factors are irrelevant to my original point as well.
Too many artists fail to grasp this abundantly simple point: once you release a piece of art you cannot control how others use it or how others choose to see it.
The Copyright Act protects several activities as the exclusive rights of a work's creator and offers legal remedies if those rights are infringed. For every other perceived offense against their creations artists have only one reliable defense. To accept the unchangeable fact that other people get to express themselves too and to act like a grownup when that happens.
Di Modica is whining.
