DISQUS

talboito · 10 months ago

I'm not sure why this rhetoric helps your point.

Maybe your robotic taxation-bots will alleviate the tax burden of artists producing the fruits of aesthetic revolution rather than those pigs-at-the-trough bourgies sketching campaign posters?

Christopher Monnier · 10 months ago

Would you say the same thing about homemade Ron Paul signs (regardless of how they compare aesthetically to the Obama stuff)? Is homemade Obama propaganda less acceptable because Obama's philosophy is more authoritarian than Paul's?

Will Wilkinson · 10 months ago

It's not that Obama's an authoritarian so much as he's completely establishment -- a living embodiment of elite consensus. Ron Paul really was an outsider, not even welcome in his own party debates. and I'd say the efforts of Paul's supporters were useful in getting a message that would have otherwise gone unheard to a broader audience.

Christopher Monnier · 10 months ago

Obama was once an outsider (well, sort of), too. But the Obama propaganda has continued way beyond the time when Obama could have been considered an outsider.

ronbailey · 10 months ago

Oh sure, and I take it that we are to assume that YOU are actual outsider, the one true voice, standing bravely against and outside the conformist mainstream. Blow it out your ass, Wilkinson. At least Fairey had balls enough to actually create something.

Will Wilkinson · 10 months ago

I wrote this blog post, didn't I?

AnotherBen · 10 months ago

I think Shepard Fairy just decided he likes money. I expect he's did quite well for himself before Obama and will be doing much better now.

As to political art, while as art, it has often been pretty good and interesting, as politics it is usually utterly pedestrian, no matter that it comes from a mainstream or fringe political perspective.

Cool Cal · 10 months ago

There was actually, in my neighborhood, on Pico blvd., a large billboard that after the election had one of the images of Obama combined with a likeness of Lincoln (clever) - I believe this lithograph can be found at the Obama Art Report. I can't imagine who paid for that billboard space (billboard advertising ain't cheap in Los Angeles), but thank God it is now back to being used for ad space for Gatorade or Wrigley's.

PK · 10 months ago

I think you should read Quentin Skinner on Hobbes and rhetorical redescription and change your writing style.

Will Wilkinson · 10 months ago

OK! That book looks great.

Dain · 10 months ago

The authors of The Rebel Sell are on point.

Copyrights & Campaigns · 10 months ago

Fairey is not "getting sued." Just the opposite: he preemptively sued the AP, asking a federal court to declare that he did not infringe the copyright in the photo. I've posted the complaint here:

http://copyrightsandcampaigns.blogspot.com/2009...

leatherdonut · 10 months ago

This is beyond stupid. It is obvious you know NOTHING about copyright law.

Fair use is a defense not a right. Fairey took an image and traced it out. Idee has confirmed that it is a virtual match with the AP picture.

To top it off, it is not even clear that the AP owns the picture due to the photographer being a temporary hire.

If Fairey infringed on the image, he needs to deal with the consequence. End of story.

Robert Paulson · 10 months ago

I don't know (or really care) who you, Will Wilkinson are but after reading your ego centric post it's pretty obvious that you don't know what you are talking about. But then, that doesn't surprise me when I find you are with the Cato Institute. I have a few Libertarian leanings my self but find, generally speaking, that libertarians are firmly lodged in the nineteenth century and, frankly, I prefer the twenty first century . That's where you'll find Shepard Fairey so it's not surprising that you disagree.

You use "no time flat" which was actually 20 years. You use "My guess is" which pretty much say's it all and confirms that you don't have a clue. You state," Fringe protest is sexy, in certain circles, but it remains that only the people with power have power".

For the past two years preceding the Obama Hope image Shepard Fairey was already one of the most important emerging artists in the world. Now, with his image in the National Portrait Gallery of the Smithsonian, he is definitely one of the most important artists in the world. That standing brings with it a certain amount of power and if you don't see that then you should google "Shepard Fairey", 5,740,000 listings. The fact that you are writing about him when up until recently you probably had never had heard of him also proves my point. You then add, "That’s why I consider ... a regrettable failure of American grassroots culture-making,... in which you totally dismiss or are oblivious to the overwhelming popularity, respect and hope for the future of our country that has been inspired by Barack Obama coming out of the miserable, hateful and disingenuous eight years of the Bush/Cheney/Rove crime family and the disaster they perpetrated on the American people.


Your Wikipedia entry which, I would imagine, you wrote yourself, has this entry near the bottom, "On June 27, 2008, Wilkinson was cited by David Brooks as a member of a "group of young and unpredictable rightward-leaning writers" who have "emerged on the scene" in recent years. He calls their emergence a "genuine bright spot" for the conservative movement." Good luck with that, Mr. Bright Spot. The "conservative movement has been marginalized and is loosing it's more intelligent members and the Fascists on talk radio will end up with the ignorant dregs. The conservative movement is so nineteenth century. Get over it or be left behind as a footnote in the history books.

stephen · 10 months ago

hear that will? how dare you question the leader! 'cause, like, bush, and cheney, and something or other!

anyway, robert (and history!) are coming for you, and they are armed with google, and a 27 by 40 poster!

Robert Paulson · 10 months ago

One of the ignorant dregs has spoken. He hasn't made any sense but he has spoken. We applaud your effort but If your blather is supposed to be in Will's defense, you were a miserable failure. All you did is justify my comment and help prove my point and I thank you for that.

David Sutherland · 10 months ago

Dear Will, thanks for the discussion.

I am not sure I understand all your points but there is something quite hypocritical in the anti-authoritarian, anti-captilistic "street-art" scene that I think you may be pointing out. Well, perhaps it's just my cynicism having grown weary of all the "anti's"

I created and posted this image today after watching "POPaganda: The Art & Crimes of Ron English":
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Shepard_Faire... but I don't know how long it will stay up because I can't figure out wikipedia's bureaucratic nightmare for posting fair-use works.

For the record, I voted for someone other than Obama this last election. But I have HOPE we'll somehow get through to another time (and will be in debt for some time.)

Wax · 10 months ago

I keep reading people compare him to Warhol and Litchenstein. My grandfather knew them both been clear that Shepard Fairey does not come close to them. For one, they appropriated recognizable imagery. Fairey just rips off little known works and photographs. He has stolen from a number of minority artists. If he was a more conservative bent artist people would be calling him a racist. And it is lame that he is crying fair use now because he has sent cease letters to artists like Baxter Orr who did the same with his Obey poster.

PBW · 9 months ago

Fairey is a hypocrite. Here's an article of him going after "the little guy."
He has become the same thing he claims to fight against. Some art advocate.

http://www.pittsburghcitypaper.ws/gyrobase/Cont...

John · 9 months ago

I came across this post when surfing for some background on a Fairey poster. I don't really want to get into how certain pieces contain more depth than others, or if Fairey has "sold out;" that's not really the point here.

Only addressing the ripoff issue - Fairey's work doesn't "blatantly rip-off" older posters. What he does is take an existing piece (this includes the feelings and subtext that go with it) and recreate it in a way that is meant to elicit a response.

So in the Soviet propaganda posters you mentioned above, Fairey's taking the visual ascetic and saying that certain things we are told equate to Big Brother in Communist Russia. We are told to "obey." But why do we?

As with all art, the meaning behind the pieces doesn't always come through to people that are unfamiliar with the source material or references made. A lot of paintings during the Impressionist period referenced Greek mythology. Of course you wouldn't know it if you hadn't studied those things. Same with Fairey's work. To the untrained eye, they seem to be "ripoffs," when there are actually quite a few levels of depth to the images, including references to propaganda posters, pop-culture icons, politics, etc.

It's not much different from Warhol pieces. Warhol's painting of Campbell's Soup can wasn't because he wanted to paint that can. It was more a commentary on commercialism, culture, and what people were willing to do/buy. A lot of art is the intent behind it.

I'd suggest reading a bit more about art history. It's really interesting to see how street art has evolved and its influences. Sure you can dismiss Fairey and his ilk, but then you sound like the old guy that said that Elvis was "too sexual" or that Rock n Roll was the devil's music. The only thing that your proving is how out of touch you are with the people of today, and the people that will control tomorrow (the younger generation).