Art imitating Art: Dylan Paintings Draw Scrutiny

Gabriel M.A.

Gabriel M.A.

My Red Dot Glows For You
Local time
1:43 PM
Joined
Mar 19, 2005
Messages
9,975
Location
Paris, Frons
View My Gallery
Dylan Paintings Draw Scrutiny article at the NYT.

When the gallery announced the exhibition, called “The Asia Series,” this month, it said the collection of paintings and other artwork would provide “a visual journal” of Mr. Dylan’s travels “in Japan, China, Vietnam and Korea,” with “firsthand depictions of people, street scenes, architecture and landscape.”
Click to expand...



(c) Bob Dylan / Marcus Yam for The New York Times (hotlinked from NYT article)



(c) Henri Cartier-Bresson / Magnum Photos (hotlinked from NYT article)



But since the exhibition opened on Sept. 20, some fans and Dylanologists have raised questions about whether some of these paintings are based on Mr. Dylan’s own experiences and observations, or on photographs that are widely available and that he did not take.
Click to expand...


When does copying a photograph become a "firsthand depiction"? Semantics? Misinterpretation? Misrepresentation? (should we have a poll? 😉 )
 
Last edited:
I hope Mr. Dylan and/or the gallery do not have the temerity to add insult to injury by saying that making paintings of these photographs and passing them on as original work was deliberate and meant as a statement by the "artist" (or some other bs like that). So ridiculous.
 
If I take a snap of one of those Dylan paintings, then try to sell it... what will the Gagosian/Bobby's lawyers do?
 
I have no idea about the facts or "lying"...but come on...painting a photograph is a problem? If I took a photograph of Van Gogh, is that a crime? If I took a photograph of Henri Bresson's photo, is that a crime? I dunno.

This could be interesting discussion in law school...maybe I should go back and re-take that class and... nah, forget it!😛 I am a happy man.
 
v_roma said:
I hope Mr. Dylan and/or the gallery do not have the temerity to add insult to injury by saying that making paintings of these photographs and passing them on as original work was deliberate and meant as a statement by the "artist" (or some other bs like that). So ridiculous.
Click to expand...

They did, albeit in a roundabout contradictory to their opening statement way!

I find it hard to believe that the Gargosian would feel thay need to show this crap, after all they do have a reputation for showing good art! Nor can I believe that Bob is so pathetic that he needs to go after even more publicity with such unoriginal work!
 
dave lackey said:
I have no idea about the facts or "lying"...but come on...painting a photograph is a problem? If I took a photograph of Van Gogh, is that a crime? If I took a photograph of Henri Bresson's photo, is that a crime? I dunno.

This could be interesting discussion in law school...maybe I should go back and re-take that class and... nah, forget it!😛 I am a happy man.
Click to expand...

If you take a photograph of a Van Gogh and try to sell it you will probably be in a little bit of trouble.
 
On Monday a press representative for the Gagosian Gallery said in a statement: “While the composition of some of Bob Dylan’s paintings is based on a variety of sources, including archival, historic images, the paintings’ vibrancy and freshness come from the colors and textures found in everyday scenes he observed during his travels.”
The gallery also pointed to an interview with Mr. Dylan in its exhibition catalog, in which he is asked whether he paints from sketches or photographs. He responds:
“I paint mostly from real life. It has to start with that. Real people, real street scenes, behind the curtain scenes, live models, paintings, photographs, staged setups, architecture, grids, graphic design. Whatever it takes to make it work. What I’m trying to bring out in complex scenes, landscapes, or personality clashes, I do it in a lot of different ways. I have the cause and effect in mind from the beginning to the end. But it has to start with something tangible.”
 
Looking at the articles I can't see anywhere where he has given the slightest hint of respect to the original photographer or painter. A lot of the criticism could have been avoided with some homage paid, as we all should when we base a work on another persons I feel. So one has assume maybe he thought no one would figure it out, but could he be that stupid?
 
Just to back up what I wrote above; Bob is not very good at crediting other people, or at hiding it!

"Because it has emerged now, in the cyberspace floodplain of information, that path is also glaringly lit. By failing to acknowledge the source for a dozen lines or verses in five cuts -- "All songs written by Bob Dylan," the album's liner notes declare -- the songwriter, unintentionally or not, raises hot-button questions about the use or misuse of another artist's work."

http://articles.sfgate.com/2003-07-..._1_artist-s-work-downloading-college-teachers


Joni Mitchell doesn't seem to like him much...

"Bob is not authentic at all," she said. "He's a plagiarist and his name and voice are fake. Everything about Bob is a deception. We are like night and day, he and I."

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-accuses-bob-dylan-of-plagiarism-1952970.html
 
MickH said:
If I take a snap of one of those Dylan paintings, then try to sell it... what will the Gagosian/Bobby's lawyers do?
Click to expand...


I don't know...maybe we can try it and post the results on RFF. Beats another bag thread.😛 Or shoe thread. Or...

BTW, can we post a photo on RFF as in the OP without permission? No idea...
 
someone should go in there and start to take photographs of them, maybe with their phone, and when they are told to stop ask why do you own the copyright on them? an interesting conversation would follow!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom