Thursday, November 29, 2007

Shepard Fairey's Next Show


I recently came across an essay titled "Obey Plagerist Shepard Fairey- A Critique by Artist Mark Vallen"

I have attended a few public lectures by Fairey, and have read his recent book that is a retrospective of his art work where he has discussed the sources from which some of his works derive from. -But just some of them that Vallen's article discusses.

Does anybody know if Fairey has written about where he got his sources from all of his "borrowed works"?


Mack said...

Yes. Fairey talks about it in almost every in-depth interview he gives.

Mark Vallen is simply trying to jumpstart his go-nowhere career by bashing someone who actually HAS one. It's a time-honored tradition among the second-rate and failing. The fact that he passed out literature-- including HIS OWN ART-- amongst those standing in line at Fairey's show ought to tell you he's simply an opportunist out to raise his own profile. If he were truly interested in constructive dialogue he would have picked up the phone and made the local call to Fairey to ask him about it. Then, if he wasn't satisfied with the answers-- or at least wanted to include them-- he could have offered up the other side of the coin. Instead, he posted a shrill call of "Look at Me!" in hopes of selling a few more canvases of his Jr. High caliber artwork. Pretty sad, really.

James said...

I HIGHLY doubt that Mark Vallen had anything to do with the mystery envelopes at the show. Did you recieve one of these envelopes? I would really like to see what they contained.

Lucky Adrastus said...

I read Vallen's article criticizing Fairey, and his arguments seem pretty juvenile to me. (I'm following "Mack"'s lead in identifying the author as Mark Vallen). Basically, Vallen takes Fairey's artworks and juxtaposes them with their sources of inspiration. Fairey doesn't exactly hide the fact that his art (like most) is commentary on previous artworks. Vallen's not demonstrating plagarism, he's justing showing that he knows enough about art to know what pieces Fairey is commenting on, but not enough to recognize artistic commentary. Fairey's artwork clearly falls within the realm of fair comment -- he's taking previous works and recontextualizing them. It's no more plagarism that all the Greco-Roman architecture in Washington, DC is "plagarism" of the Grecian sculpture Phidias.

Vallen's article is also filled with dumb and bizarre potshots at Fairey. He writes that Fairey wouldn't know what "plagarism" means. Ooh, burn. Somehow I imagine Fairey picked up the definition of plagarism somewhere back in Junior High, like the rest of us. Vallen also writes that Fairey cannot draw. This is just ignorant. Although much of Fairey's artwork is "found artwork," he also draws many of his pieces originally.

The worst examples that Vallen can find are of Fairey using someone else's piece without getting permission, but immediately stopping and paying royalties when contacted by the copyright holder. Yeah, it's an example of where Fairey should have been more careful in the first place, but he doesn't exactly come off like a psycho-killer.

Oh, and I have no dog in this fight. I tend to like Fairey's work, but think some (not all) of his recent political work is kinda of boring and didactic. I'm totally unfamilir with Vallen's work.

Mack said...

The envelopes contained a one Dollar bill, his treatise on Fairey's "plagiarism and a "limited edition" (xx/100) piece of Vallen's artwork.

In my judgement, the inclusion of the Washington raised the value of the associated art by precisely 200%.

Mack said...

Oh-- and who said anything about envelopes? Not me (though that's exactly how the material was received). Nice.

Anonymous said...

"The envelopes contained a one Dollar bill, his treatise on Fairey's "plagiarism and a "limited edition" (xx/100) piece of Vallen's artwork."

Which artwork was it? Can anyone post a photo?

Anonymous said...

Update On Vallen Fairey clash