That Ron Dude Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 If Heath had painted the exact same paintings as Lichy they would have been worth zip-fine art is more about being in the in crowd than what you actually produce. Those paintings are valuable because Lichy was a known accepted artist. Not because of their content. Enter this circle and you can hock a loogie on a canvas and it will be worth big bucks. Except that Roy Lichtenstein was a nobody - an art teacher at Rutgers - who, in becoming a pioneer of Pop Art, had to fight the same battles with the Art Establishment and general public in the early 1960s that fanboys are still waging 50 years later. The New York Times called him "one of the worst artists in America", while Life Magazine asked, "Is He the Worst Artist in the U.S.?", answering itself by saying, "For some of America's best known critics and laymen, the answer to the above question is a resounding YES." Of course, over time, his innovation and importance was recognized by the art establishment, while his style and iconography (as with Pop Art in general) have become entrenched in pop culture. It's only a small group of comic book fanboys who still think he's just a plagiarist and scam artist. So because he spend more time copying one panel then some one else who did a whole book and making it bigger where he can add or in some cases less detail thats makes him better? Nope. The power of a Lichtenstein is not derived from the lines swiped from the original comic panels. If he wanted to, he could certainly have created his own - but, that wasn't the point of Pop Art. But, that's beside the point - the power of Lichtenstein's comic paintings is derived from taking the original panel out of context and re-purposing it, as well as transforming it into a larger size, with brighter colors, thicker lines and Ben-Day dots to simulate mechanical/photographic reproduction as if it were done by a commercial printer. It was innovative, breakthrough stuff at the time, and has since become an important, iconic part of art history. The source material, on the other hand, was not innovative or important in any way, shape or form. Every successful fine artist was once a nobody and ignored. I'm talking about once they become accepted-and that acceptance often has nothing to do with their actual work-it can be paint spatters or a crucifix in urine. I have read the stories about Jack Kirby getting poorly treated. Same for Ditko, the creators of Superman, Steve Gerber, Don Martin, Gene Day, Bill Finger, and more. It would be nice if Russ Heath was living it up after so many years of giving people like me great work and making my life joyful. However, as scummy as the comic book industry is, it is a collection of choir boys compared to the world of high art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aman619 Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 (edited) pssst… Drew copies from swipe materials and photos. does he credit the sources? Many times from unit photography shot by guys paid by the day or the film who don't own their work any more than Heath etc ever did. Lichtenstein gets singled out because he worked in the comic book printing style, but he was far from the first or last to reuse others' works. Edited November 8, 2014 by aman619 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadpoolJr. Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 A more recent argument that is being made now is photos being copied, and painted, or incorporated without crediting the photographer. I wonder what stance people have on that, I know that there was that whole lawsuit over the Obama campaign poster that was settled with an undisclosed amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davenport Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 pssst… Drew copies from swipe materials and photos. does he credit the sources? Many times from unit photography shot by guys paid by the day or the film who don't own their work any more than Heath etc ever did. Lichtenstein gets singled out because he worked in the comic book printing style, but he was far from the first or last to reuse others' works. You should really see the documentary. There are stories of how he'd have a pitch-perfect poster finished before a studio could get any reference material to him. He had an eye for painting famous faces from memory and took photos of himself in action poses he imagined might be in a film. Besides, reference materials and doing a 'direct lift' of line-for-line, stroke-for-stroke, angle-for-angle, placement-for-placement, vision-for-vision duplication are wholly separate approaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobstrosity Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 Equally disturbing is the Hero Initiative: What We Do decription. "Since its inception, The Hero Initiative (Formerly known as A.C.T.O.R., A Commitment To Our Roots) has had the good fortune to grant over $500,000 to over 50 comic book veterans who have paved the way for those in the industry today." When you think about it, with all the millionaires vintage comics have made you'd think HERO would be drowning in cash. Heritage, Metropolis, ComicLink, Mile High, and on and on. And that's not even thinking about character projects and the gazillions of promotional dollars flowing through SDCC, New York and the like. Warner, Disney, Stan Lee, McFarlane, directors, performers and studios. A single Action 1 or 'Tec 27 has probably gone up $500K since HERO's inception. (which may be hyperbole, I don't know, but keys have gone up A LOT). Maybe that thinking is way, way off base, but $500K over multiple years seems like floor-sweepings. Seems like if only one those pinnacle-people cut them a decent check it would blow that amount away. If anyone is interested in supporting the HERO initiative, there is a nice program from Amazon called Amazon Smile in which a small portion of every Amazon purchase you make goes to a charity of your choice - and luckily HERO is a recognized option. It costs you nothing extra, retail prices remain the same, but .5% or so goes to HERO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500Club Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 My wife corrected me. She did the photograph for Sam's Club. Her company got the account with Sam's Club that went over 4-6 million dollars. She didn't get the credit. She is no longer with the company. Four founders sold the company to Flower's Baskets for over $50 million dollars. It always sucks when you did something and got nothing. Sweat, blood and exhaust for nothing. Here's the thing. You can go it alone with your talent and creativity, start your own company, and accept all the risks of failure, or you can hire your skills out for a regular paycheck. Your wife did get something: employment and security. In hindsight, it always seems like the creator is disproportionately short changed in cases like this, but, at the time, without the umbrella of the company, the creator wouldn't have been in the position to develop the creation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Russ Heath can sell his sketches for 2-300 bucks - why doesnt he just do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500Club Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Russ Heath can sell his sketches for 2-300 bucks - why doesnt he just do that? He couldn't then, as, as was noted above, comics were simply disposable kids entertainment. On this topic, I agree with the folks who feel some type of credit should have been given. Hell, I still cringe at the thought of our high school English teachers drumming the importance of footnotes into our heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 No I mean now-cant he make a good living now selling sketches? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500Club Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 I don't know. How's his health? If he can attend shows, this is the kind of old school creator that I'd love to meet, and get a sig and/or sketch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffro. Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 I've heard his health is not great. He was at San Diego this year though. I'd also love to get a Russ Heath piece. He's one of my favorites Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He could sell em on ebay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 On this topic, I agree with the folks who feel some type of credit should have been given. Hell, I still cringe at the thought of our high school English teachers drumming the importance of footnotes into our heads. He didn't give credit for the same reason he didn't pursue the 'copyright infringement' - the less the truth is shown the more the lie can fester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 I'm watching Columbo where some lady is explaining art to him at a gallery. He asks how much is this piece etc then- how much for that one? That's the vent for the air conditioning, lieutenant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aman619 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 As befits this discussion, Scott Edelman has a blog about a new gallery showing of comics artists take on Lichtenstein appropriation of Comics creators panels. Dave Gibbons odd a brilliant take on Whaam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 According to this it was Irv Novick, not Heath that did that panel: http://dailypop.wordpress.com/2013/03/19/art-vs-art-gibbons-on-roy-lichtenstein/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davenport Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 No I mean now-cant he make a good living now selling sketches? I wondered the same thing looking at that HERO ad done at 84. Still talented, and a man with his history and body of work probably just needs a hook-up. Like Dave Stevens did for Betty Page. Some connected 'agent' to get the ball rolling on a documentary or book. Maybe a line of signed lithos like Schomburg did. Something, so he doesn't need $250 gift certificates to live. With all the 'crowd sourcing' that goes on these days, a legendary talent of Russ Heath's caliber seems like money looking for a place to happen. Maybe that HERO ad will draw some good things his way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 YES He's still an awesome artist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hado Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He could sell em on ebay I'm sure he's excited you're stepping up and speaking for him now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dupont2005 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 (edited) Every single artist has at some point in their career copied another one. I'm a big fan of the Hero Initiative, but this is just a sour grapes side swipe. The Hero Initiative wouldn't even have to exist if the Big Two had treated their talent right in the first place. But they don't want to publish a comic criticizing that. If Lichenstein paid royalties for his work, he'd be paying it to executives and shareholders who own the image depicted, not the artist. And nothing was stopping any of those comic artists from breaking into fine art but their complete lack of interest in it, until they saw someone else make some money doing it. Edited November 9, 2014 by dupont2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
