Lichtenstein Comic Inspired Art Estimated at $35-45 Million 2 2

[comix4fun]

I understand the need to protect creators' rights, but I feel that this is much closer to copying a Campbell's soup can label than anything that Frank Frazetta or even Frank Robbins ever did.

 

 

Welcome to the trademark vs. copyright, apples vs. oranges part of the debate.

[Terry Doyle]

I'll never have any great appreciation for Roy's comic canvasses, the swipes are far too blatant, but I can appreciate that he might have done other nice work (I am not familiar enough with the rest of his work).

 

Some examples for you, Bronty . . .

 

 

Brush Strokes

 

 

Magnifying Glass

 

 

New York by Night

 

 

Haystack

 

 

Landscape

 

You'll forgive me if I'm somewhat underwhelmed by these examples of Lichtenstenstein's non-comic-book swipes.

[Terry Doyle]

 

 

Not too many people cared about "Under Pressure" by Queen, but that doesn't mean Vanilla Ice got to take it and use it and not compensate the rights holder for it.

 

 

Queen and David Bowie.

 

Reached No. 1 in the UK charts at time of release - so is fairly well-known and loved (over here, at least).

[delekkerste]

[delekkerste]

 

 

Not too many people cared about "Under Pressure" by Queen, but that doesn't mean Vanilla Ice got to take it and use it and not compensate the rights holder for it.

 

 

Queen and David Bowie.

 

Reached No. 1 in the UK charts at time of release - so is fairly well-known and loved (over here, at least).

 

Exactly - it was a huge song by two hugely popular globally renowned singers. You'd have to find a small sample from an unknown song by an unknown band to make an analogy that was anywhere near comparable.

[Terry Doyle]

 

 

(shrug)

 

Kurtzman beat Lichtenstein to that one . . .

[comix4fun]

 

 

Not too many people cared about "Under Pressure" by Queen, but that doesn't mean Vanilla Ice got to take it and use it and not compensate the rights holder for it.

 

 

Queen and David Bowie.

 

Reached No. 1 in the UK charts at time of release - so is fairly well-known and loved (over here, at least).

 

 

Vanilla Ice released it here....Under Pressure never got above #29 here in 1981.

 

It was almost totally forgotten by 1990 when Vanilla Ice sampled it, got sued....paid up.

 

Then people rediscovered it here and it went on to be ranked as one of the more popular songs from the 80's.

[Terry Doyle]

 

 

Not too many people cared about "Under Pressure" by Queen, but that doesn't mean Vanilla Ice got to take it and use it and not compensate the rights holder for it.

 

 

Queen and David Bowie.

 

Reached No. 1 in the UK charts at time of release - so is fairly well-known and loved (over here, at least).

 

 

Vanilla Ice released it here....Under Pressure never got above #29 here in 1981.

 

It was almost totally forgotten by 1990 when Vanilla Ice sampled it, got sued....paid up.

 

Then people rediscovered it here and it went on to be ranked as one of the more popular songs from the 80's.

 

Exactly.

[comix4fun]

 

 

Not too many people cared about "Under Pressure" by Queen, but that doesn't mean Vanilla Ice got to take it and use it and not compensate the rights holder for it.

 

 

Queen and David Bowie.

 

Reached No. 1 in the UK charts at time of release - so is fairly well-known and loved (over here, at least).

 

Exactly - it was a huge song by two hugely popular globally renowned singers. You'd have to find a small sample from an unknown song by an unknown band to make an analogy that was anywhere near comparable.

 

 

Um no it wasn't hugely popular. Nice try.

It was a blip in the US....#29 and then GONE.

 

And there are samples all across the spectrum of popularity.

 

It would not have mattered whether it was by a #1 artist or someone played only on Cable access channels. The same rights are there for published artists.

[Bronty]

I do like this one

 

[delekkerste]

Um no it wasn't hugely popular. Nice try.

It was a blip in the US....#29 and then GONE.

 

And there are samples all across the spectrum of popularity.

 

It would not have mattered whether it was by a #1 artist or someone played only on Cable access channels. The same rights are there for published artists.

 

Are you seriously going to try and argue that "Under Pressure" was "nearly forgotten" by 1990? That song became a staple of Queen concerts, live albums, radio play, MTV video airplay, Top Songs of All-Time countdowns, etc. after its release. Who cares where it top charted in 1981? I bet there are many other extremely popular songs that didn't chart much better than #29 (or even at that level) in the U.S. when they were released (and let's not forget the song was and remained extremely popular worldwide). When Vanilla Ice sampled that riff, EVERYBODY recognized where it came from, both in the U.S. and around the world.

[Terry Doyle]

I'll never have any great appreciation for Roy's comic canvasses, the swipes are far too blatant, but I can appreciate that he might have done other nice work (I am not familiar enough with the rest of his work).

 

 

New York by Night

 

 

Oops, sorry, 'New York by Night' was my own Lichtenstein-inspired artwork.

 

I'm surprised none of our resident Lichtenstein-experts let that one go by unnoticed?

[Koa]

just because you steal from a lesser known source doesn't make it more legit.

 

 

Edited January 16, 2013 by KingKoa

[Bronty]

I'll never have any great appreciation for Roy's comic canvasses, the swipes are far too blatant, but I can appreciate that he might have done other nice work (I am not familiar enough with the rest of his work).

 

Some examples for you, Bronty . . .

 

 

Brush Strokes

 

.

 

Thanks Terry. I think this one is pretty cool

[Terry Doyle]

I'll never have any great appreciation for Roy's comic canvasses, the swipes are far too blatant, but I can appreciate that he might have done other nice work (I am not familiar enough with the rest of his work).

 

Some examples for you, Bronty . . .

 

 

Brush Strokes

 

.

 

Thanks Terry. I think this one is pretty cool

 

Not my cup of tea, but good for you.

[comix4fun]

Um no it wasn't hugely popular. Nice try.

It was a blip in the US....#29 and then GONE.

 

And there are samples all across the spectrum of popularity.

 

It would not have mattered whether it was by a #1 artist or someone played only on Cable access channels. The same rights are there for published artists.

 

Are you seriously going to try and argue that "Under Pressure" was "nearly forgotten" by 1990? That song became a staple of Queen concerts, live albums, radio play, MTV video airplay, Top Songs of All-Time countdowns, etc. after its release. Who cares where it top charted in 1981? I bet there are many other extremely popular songs that didn't chart much better than #29 (or even at that level) in the U.S. when they were released (and let's not forget the song was and remained extremely popular worldwide). When Vanilla Ice sampled that riff, EVERYBODY recognized where it came from, both in the U.S. and around the world.

 

 

Are you serious going to argue that the POPULARITY of the sample taken has any bearing on whether or not the person lifting the sample will have to pay royalties? Let's not cloud the point.

 

Cuz that would be wrong. Really really wrong.

 

 

And Queen stopped playing that song in 1986, and a lot of those top all time lists and greatest hit albums were published POST 1991. Check it out.

 

 

[Bronty]

 

I think where my opinion differs from yours and Chris' is that I don't believe that all comic art rises up to the level of Kirby, Ditko, Eisner, Miller, etc., a.k.a. the true artistes of the genre.

 

I'm not sure Lichtenstein could have credited the artists by name even if he wanted to

 

I think you have to do what Chris C. said earlier in this thread - go take a look at one of these paintings in person. ....All of his pre-comic Pop Art were copies too - of objects, advertisements, etc.

 

Aside from the connection to Lichtenstein, none of us here would stoop to collect this OA, so I say let's stop pretending this stuff is something other than what it really is.

 

And, I think it's also fairly evident that Lichtenstein helped elevate comics as an art form... I, for one, would rather acknowledge and be grateful for than resentful.

 

Taking these points in turn..

 

- of course I (and I assume Chris) don't think all comic art is gold. The majority is drek.

 

- I'm sure he had no clue who he was swiping from, I agree.

 

- You are right, it would probably help me if I could see them in person (not practical right now) but I have trouble getting around the fundamental fact that they are copies or near copies. At worst its theft and at best its lazy. I agree that at the time it was no doubt viewed as banal drek not worthy of credit, but opinions and societal attitudes change over time on all sorts of things so I don't buy the 'it was OK then' mindset (so was driving home after 10 martinis). He a point to make, fine. Well I wish he had done it by creating his own comic images - his point would have been no less relevant by creating his own original canvasses in the style of comic images without usurping someone else's work. Perhaps that's expecting too much in that somewhere there is a person who designed the campbell's soup can, and we're not spooning about that person not getting credit. I guess at the end of the day that's because I view comic art as art of a type and the soup can not so much. Where does art end and begin? Is a painted canvas of a Ford Mustang ripping off the person who designed the Ford Mustang... well, no... so I see where you are going with all this. I guess that leaves us each having to figure out where art ends and begins in our own view......... It would seem Lich viewed comic art as just 'source material' as opposed to art. Given that he was swiping the efforts of others and from some very talented artists too.... there's a reason those war panels looked good... I can't personally reconcile some of the swiped comic art to being anything other than art. Ie I can't view a Kubert or Heath image theft as anything other than image theft.

 

- I'm not so sure that in a world without Lichtenstein none of us would collect the stuff. Maybe you are right, but it seems to me that the world is so different today and so full of advertising and the related images that someone else would certainly have come up with these ideas if it wasn't warhol, lichtenstein et al. In the 1960s it was a novel idea. By now, its obvious and the point would have been made sooner or later. That doesn't lessen any contribution they made, or take away the fact they were first, but I think we would have gotten here regardless. It was a cultural inevitability that they were the first to tap in to.

 

- I suppose he probably did elevate comics as an art form some, and I suppose that yes we should be grateful for that. Just wish he'd gone about it a different way. The way it was done leaves a sour taste in my mouth and doesn't seem 'honest' within my own world view.

[delekkerste]

Are you serious going to argue that the POPULARITY of the sample taken has any bearing on whether or not the person lifting the sample will have to pay royalties? Let's not cloud the point.

 

Cuz that would be wrong. Really really wrong.

 

 

And Queen stopped playing that song in 1986, and a lot of those top all time lists and greatest hit albums were published POST 1991. Check it out.

 

 

Chris, you're the one turning an analogy into legality. The fact is, riffing off of "Under Pressure", a top-40 smash hit in the U.S. and #1/top-10 hit in almost every country outside of the U.S., by two of the greatest rock acts of all-time, maybe analogous legally to what Lichtenstein did, but common sense says...not really.

 

My local radio station had an annual survey of the top 500 rock songs of all-time that they played every 4th of July weekend. "Under Pressure" was always on that list when I was living in San Diego from 1985-1989 (i.e., pre-Vanilla Ice). There are many other classic, beloved, well-remembered rock songs out there that didn't crack the Billboard top 10 or 20. Having grown up in the '80s, "Under Pressure" was always one of my favorite songs; I remember taping it on cassette from the radio when it came out (I may even still have that tape somewhere at my parents' house) and the local rock station in Colorado was counting down the best songs of the year at year-end.

 

Just because Queen stopped playing it live after FIVE YEARS doesn't mean that people forgot about it, any more than people have forgotten "New Year's Day" or "Bad" or "In God's Country" or "All I Want Is You" just because U2 is playing other songs at their shows nowadays. Music fans don't tend to forget great songs by great bands. Wikipedia-based arguments can only get you so far.

[comix4fun]

Are you serious going to argue that the POPULARITY of the sample taken has any bearing on whether or not the person lifting the sample will have to pay royalties? Let's not cloud the point.

 

Cuz that would be wrong. Really really wrong.

 

 

And Queen stopped playing that song in 1986, and a lot of those top all time lists and greatest hit albums were published POST 1991. Check it out.

 

 

Chris, you're the one turning an analogy into legality. The fact is, riffing off of "Under Pressure", a top-40 smash hit in the U.S. and #1/top-10 hit in almost every country outside of the U.S.,

 

 

 

It was ALWAYS about legality...that was the point, if you take someone else's work, no matter how short a track, small an image, tiny a piece IT STILL BELONGS TO THEM. If you want to use it you give credit and you PAY.

 

You should be a DJ the way you spin.

 

 

"Top 40 Smash in the US" Maybe you can represent bands that get get their songs to crack the top 25.

 

And yes I am sure Queen was waiting by the phone to hear how they were doing in Argentina.

[delekkerste]

- You are right, it would probably help me if I could see them in person (not practical right now) but I have trouble getting around the fundamental fact that they are copies or near copies. At worst its theft and at best its lazy. I agree that at the time it was no doubt viewed as banal drek not worthy of credit, but opinions and societal attitudes change over time on all sorts of things so I don't buy the 'it was OK then' mindset (so was driving home after 10 martinis).

 

I don't think it's theft or lazy. It's Pop Art. If he made his own images entirely, it would have been something different. He took the banal objects and images of mass commercial culture and transformed them into his vision of art. The decision to make many aspects the same to the source material was a deliberate part of the process. He was the originator of Pop Art - he did the first Pop painting, not Warhol. And, remember, he did this while Abstract Expressionism was all the rage - he was a true pioneer.

 

And, you really do have to see these in person. Comparing the source panels to the art in same-sized JPEG images on a website like Barsalou does is an absolutely absurd exercise. I'm sure that the overwhelming majority of people who saw the retrospective were extremely impressed by it and don't have any of the hang-ups expressed here. When you see it, you know you're looking at greatness. The original comic book? It is what it is, but what it is not is great in any way, shape or form.

 

You really need to see his very excellent sculptures as well.