Shepard Fairey, Fair Use, Plagiarism in Street and Fine Art
by KAI ONE
No matter what you think about Obama, it is hard to deny his election to the presidency and meteoric rise to popular attention, was at least due in part to the oft bootlegged red white, and blue social realist style HOPE illustration. The original (and I use the term loosely) piece of art was created by Shepard Fairey the second or third week in January 2008, one year before Obama took office. Just recently, a large scale variant by Fairey has been inducted into the Smithsonian as the official presidential portrait: the cash cow has truly come home. Once just an innocuous hack poster adored by the nation of liberal automatons, the poster is starting to bring real money and accolades.
It’s obviously doing more for Fairey’s career than any advertisement, award, or show could and I’m sure he’s making money hand over fist even faster than before. The Associated Press is now suing Fairey because he allegedly traced the original portrait of Obama from a photograph taken by Manny Garcia. Supporters of Fairey like to point out he did nothing to stop the mass proliferation of bootleg posters, shirts and other merchandise based on the now iconic Obey poster. Fairey himself even recalls a run in with guy who had a sweatshirt with the same image that had been “Bedazzled, like made out of jewels and fake diamonds and shit”. When the bootlegger asked Fairey if his interpretation was cool with him, he replied in the affirmative. I’m sure that would not be the case if the young man’s rip-offs were outselling Fairey’s rip offs.
from Vectortuts
A full disclosure is in order by saying, I’m really not that fond of Shepard Fairey’s art and once while working for UPS, I tried to void out a bunch of his insurance claims on some damaged works. Although, I think he should go by the title of “studio tracer” rather than “street artist,” I let a copy of his Obama poster stay up on the façade of the building where I had my last exhibition because of my respect for Obama not Fairey. As a young kid, I was really into his stuff before realizing that his entire oeuvre is a rip-off of Soviet Propaganda posters. I remember how cheated I felt when I found a book of the real Soviet posters; I promptly traded my red, black, and gold Fairey print for a bag of weed. Even Fairey’s claim to fame (Andre the Giant) is a rip off. From his website: “In 1989 the Charleston, South Carolinian attended the prestigious Rhode Island School of Design, where he studied illustration and discovered screen-printing. In that same year Shepard stumbled onto Andre the Giant’s image by chance in a newspaper.” Hack artist from the start and less than twenty years later the face gets cropped and advertised illegally for free by wanna-be radicals and street kids across the globe.
Graffiti and especially street art have a long history of image appropriation. While the letter styles used in graffiti have always been unique the characters which accompany the letters are often culled from comic book or other facets of pop culture. Even Fab Five Freddy famously painted an homage to Warhol’s soup cans on the side of a New York subway train in the eighties. Street artist “stencilers” often copy or transform pre-existing images for their own use. The enforcement of copyright infringement is trumped by the fact that these artists are illegally putting up these images with no financial gain in mind. Even if the original artists wanted to sue, they would have no recourse due to the anonymity of the street artists and lack of any legal financial gain.
You would have thought all this talk about appropriation and fair use in the art would have been settled a long time ago but perhaps it is now more important than ever. Andy Warhol (whose foundation hands out law suits for copyright infringement even now) was punked out of using found photographs when he was sued for his Flowers series, based on photos of hibiscus taken by Patricia Caulfield. He lost the lawsuit causing him to at least fully explore the possibilities silkscreen could bring to his own Polaroid pictures and I think he was a better artist for it. So was Warhol a rip off artist and if he wasn’t, then how can Fairey be? Their two styles are similar as well as their paths to fame. Both had other people do their leg work, Warhol had his mother doing his commercial blotted line illustrations and Fairey had a nation of toys put up his Andre the Giant has a posse stickers. They both made art with found images and painted them by means of a mechanical reproduction process (silkscreen), already two steps removed from any innovative creation. Do you think Warhol’s career would be quashed by Campbell’s Soup Co. if he was coming out as an artist today? Almost certainly so. Even as recently as 2001, the artist Damien Loeb (who unlike Fairey and Warhol is a technical painting virtuoso) was sued along with his dealer Mary Boone over his appropriation of found images in his paintings. But just like Fairey and Andy, he saw that there is no such thing as bad publicity and he quickly sold out his show.
A key difference in the plight of Fairey as opposed to Warhol, Loeb, Koons, or Salle is that Fairey came up as a self proclaimed street artist. This leads us to the question of what is fair use. Should it matter if you are ripping off an image for financial gain or not? Obviously if you are not making a cent off of the artwork in any fashion then there would be no point to try and sue you. In the world of tattoo, a hotspot for the use and reproduction of trademarked and public domain images, there appears to be a general unspoken rule: if you change at least five things about another artist’s drawing than it is yours.
So is Warhol a hack? Sure. Is Fairey a hack? Sure. Do I think that they should be sued for their appropriation of images? No. Do I respect them? Not really. Do I care if Fairey ripped off an AP photographer if it helps make the world a better place? No. Would I be irate if he had done the same thing to get McCain elected? Most likely. Would I do the same thing if I were in there shoes? Probably. In this postmodern age we seem to value the ideas over the craftsmanship. I think this is the number one fallacy in modern America and if things don’t change quickly we will soon be a society of helpless invalids with millions of ideas but no way to put them into action. This is not to say that I want vacuous paintings with technical proficiency. I want a firm middle ground. I want the brush skill of an old world master mixed with the explosive rhetoric of a meat and bomb adorned performance artist. I want style and substance. I want art that comes from the bowels by way of the brain. This isn’t too much to ask for, and it might be the only thing that can save painting.
More information about Fairey, and his battle with the AP can be found here and here or here.
Comments
Kai,
Since Fairey's been busted in Boston for defacing public property, and because he has a long history of doing so all over the world, what do you think is going to happen at his trial? Other taggers are currently doing hard time in state pens for no more than the same thing, right? So does Fairey get off easy 'cos he's rich and famous?
Posted by: RG | février 12, 2009 01:16 AM
I love the Obamaton for KAI - thanks. A plethora of fools got popped and got dished huge fines and lengthy bids in 2008. Most of them were actual graffiti writers and not toys so they did a bit of damage. Shep is a white collar criminal at best - but I'm sure Bubba in the pen is hoping he comes for a visit. I would recommend prison time for Shep only if all his assets be relinquished to me and all his art burned lol
Posted by: kai | février 12, 2009 10:25 AM
"This is not to say that I want vacuous paintings with technical proficiency. I want a firm middle ground. I want the brush skill of an old world master mixed with the explosive rhetoric of a meat and bomb adorned performance artist."
I like this.
Posted by: poor al | février 12, 2009 07:57 PM
I have been a fan of Fairey for awhile now. I first noticed his stickers and Russian propaganda, anti-establishment posters etc.. I never understood his fascination with Andre the giant or the whole posse thing.
I thought his art had meaning. he was trying to tell us something... Don't trust the government, big business is evil. He caught our attention by doing it in a Russian Cold war style. How could our American government be anything like the Soviets or Chinese? In America we are all individuals , we are not grouped into masses like the communists are. I think Fairey showed us that we are not that different.
The word "Obey" is very strong... Follow the rules...Do what I say... Nobody wants to obey anyone else. The problem is we have to obey the rules of society or be outcasts. If you don't obey the laws of this government you can lose your freedom. If you don't obey your boss at work you get fired.
Fairey makes us think. That's what I try to do as an artist. Make the wheels start spinning in your head.
I work at my own gallery, I am a picture framer. My customers are framing up pictures of Obama like crazy. I got a Fairey poster in the front window right now. A La Jolla Gallery just brought me a "original" Peter Max of Obama to frame. Talk about a hack...
I see these images after Obama becomes President. I didn't see too many artists that supported Obama before he was elected. Fairey got on the bandwagon early. I am glad he is making money. He is helping my business by selling his art.
Ryan Campbell
Posted by: ryan | février 14, 2009 09:37 AM
Thanks KAI ONE for your thought-provoking piece. It made me think a lot about the topic.
Posted by: DS | février 14, 2009 02:22 PM
Ryan,
Your post illustrates what some people don't like about Shepard Fairey: namely, his apparent hypocrisy.
As you noted, you viewed Fairey's art as meaningful, and among its various meanings was the idea that big business is evil. A lot of people have thought this about his art.
But it's also a documented fact that Fairey — through his other company, Studio Number One — designs branding and promotional campaigns for corporate clients such as Honda, Mountain Dew, and Saks Fifth Avenue. So he's in bed with big business.
There's serious money to be made selling symbolic rebellion to the masses — Fairey knows it, and works it hard. The question then becomes whether you see this as ironic or deceptive.
Posted by: RG | février 14, 2009 11:13 PM
Yo Ry Ry if Obama and Shep are helping you eat vis a vis some liberal douche who wants a cool soviet style pic of our new president- thats what's up. I would honestly take a FREE Shep Obama pic and hang it on my wall. The thing is he is fucking up how i'm going to eat by being a false face for my subculture to the art buying public. Gleaves is right in saying that he is a corporate tool - but baby boy better get his 15 minutes in while he can. Ry also points out the power of the OBEY brand, which is Sheps biggest hack of all. If I was John Carpenter I'd be suing him as well.
Posted by: kaiboski | février 15, 2009 09:10 PM
Kaibot, since you're chucking the L word around so vigorously, does that make you a Tagger for Christ?
Posted by: Vaginal Shower | février 16, 2009 07:30 PM
No sir I work for the other side actually.
Posted by: kaibot | février 17, 2009 08:38 AM
KAI
Thank you, thank you, thank you for the posting.
Shepard Fairey is not an artist. The difference between Warhol and Fairey is that Warhol is an artist. Fairey is a designer. Warhol's images of famous people recontextualize the images (even if he always claimed not to be doing this, which was another aspect of the complexity of his work, playing with the media) to comment on issues of fame and cult of personality. These are topics Warhol was well aware of his entire life and were subjects in a large portion of his work. Fairey on the other hand does not comment on the people he is portraying. He simply uses their already established persona and presents it a straight forward way or in a way that is so blatantly obvious that doesn't allow the viewer to think about it longer than a half a second. While the image did help Obama get elected it also presents Obama as a Big Brother type figurehead. As much as I like Obama, this poster is the Left's version of all those paintings of Bush holding doves, standing in front of fighter planes, in front of the flag etc, which also derive from social realism and Norman Rockwell. The Left just prefers a different visual language than the Right. Both are images of Hero worship. Hero worship, no matter how much you like the person, is not art. It is pure propaganda, which is something that is designed. This is why it is so easy for Fairey to jump back an forth between producing designs for large corporations and his "own" work. Like all good corporate logos (and nationalistic ones for that matter) the brand has to maintain its street "cred" so as not to seem corporate and lose its audience/consumers.
OBEY=Golden Arches. Fairey is a brand... like Thomas Kinkade. He has to tag buildings in order to maintain the image of his brand. "Painter of Light" or "Painter of Streets". Take your pick.
As far as being sued for his work... If he is an artist: No If he is a designer: probably.
Posted by: David White | février 18, 2009 05:38 PM
Great insight David - I really like your comments - the only thing I will add before I let this horse die is that - I respect Tommy Kinkade more then Fagly as an artist - lol
Posted by: kai | février 19, 2009 08:46 AM
I think Shepard crossed the line of fair use. I tend to agree with some of the criticism that Brian Sherwin has had on the issue. If you have not read his criticism of Fairey on the Myartspace Blog you should.
Posted by: Chaz | février 26, 2009 09:03 AM
This is what I mean. Take a look at this http://www.myartspace.com/blog/2009/02/integrity-lost-lawrence-lessig-helps.html see if he is going to be all about fair use don't you think he would have been cool with Bax boy in 2008? Anyone who uses work without permission is going to support Shepy but I think a lot of artists are pro copyright.
Posted by: Chaz | février 26, 2009 07:24 PM
Good one. especially the last paragraph but I dont think painting , street art, photography etc should be held to the same standards as each other ethically or in amount of labour or meaning. Each in their own right and to each's own taste. There's no point wishing for one idealistic artistic ethic.
Posted by: kat | mars 2, 2009 05:21 PM
Anyone who doesn't think this scam artist is stealing from other artists needs to read the article below. It outlines in great detail (and photos) no fewer than 14 instances of plagerism by Fairey. Not including the Obama poster. It's pretty shocking that this guy still has any legitimate standing in the art world.
http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm
Posted by: Allison | octobre 17, 2009 12:15 PM