Following this example in the music industry we considered what appropriation in art was. In this case, it is to use pre-existing objects or images with little or no transformation and can be found in literary, visual, musical and performance art.
Next we were introduced to a brief history of appropriation art and the key figures in the form of art. Marcel Duchamp and Picasso are arguably the leaders of appropriation. Duchamp challenged what constitutes as art by appropriating a postcard of the Mona Lisa, by taking the high art and defacing the work and presenting it as his own piece. It is interesting to consider a quote here by Jim Jarmusch "Nothing is original" and Jean-Luc Godard who said "It's not where you take things from — it's where you take them to."
Fifty years after Duchamp, Andy Warhol also made a significant impact on appropriation art in the opposite way to Duchamp by taking an ordinary item and elevating its status with his installation of Brillo boxes. The ontological differneces between the Brillo product and Warhol's replicas is that one is art and one is not. Mike Bidlo then further appropriated the work by replicating Warhol's installation 20 years later in another context, saying he was "adding another loop to the Warhol phenomenon". Art critic Hal Foster comments on how it is not the material of appropriation (eg the Brillo box or the postcard) but what they signify in the world, thus Duchamp and Warhol are transforming signs not materials.
Some lead female artists who use appropriation are Cindy Sherman and Sherrie Levine. Sherman inhabits the role of movie character in a series of photographs, playing with signs and the representation of women in film. Whilst Levine appropriates the work of Egon Schiele as she inhabits the work of other artists and disturbs the signs. Reflecting on this, I found that the similarities between the artists work was the role of inhabiting the art they appropriated.
We also considered how film can be appropriated in art with the example of the film 'Psycho' (1960). Douglas Gordon transormed the film by slowing it down to last 24 hours, whilst Gus Van Sant made a Psycho remake that is shot by shot the same as the original. Steve Dutton also talked about some of his own work here, showing us how he appropriated Sant's work further by mirroring the film and further transforming the original film.
We also considered how film can be appropriated in art with the example of the film 'Psycho' (1960). Douglas Gordon transormed the film by slowing it down to last 24 hours, whilst Gus Van Sant made a Psycho remake that is shot by shot the same as the original. Steve Dutton also talked about some of his own work here, showing us how he appropriated Sant's work further by mirroring the film and further transforming the original film.
In contemporary art, Christian Marclay is one of the current most established artists working with appropriation. Marclay also works with film, as we watched a clip of his work 'The Clock' in which he sampled hundreds of films with the image of time to create a 24 hour film that shows the time using different films.
John Stezaker makes simple collages from collecting and finding images and transforming them. Including a series of 'marriage' images where he combines images of classic film stars and overlaps their portraits. Unlike Duchamp, Stezaker uses modern techniques but with romantic ideas. This made me consider how it is not just what is visible, or the materials used but also the process and the action of finding and creating these images that is what appropriates the art.
On reflection, I found this lecture extremely interesting and relevant to my own practice, in both my independent studio project and my studio essay. I also found it relevant to the Art and Reproduction theme, where we had briefly touched on the idea of appropriation. My studio project is influenced heavily by the artist Georgia O'Keeffe, which made me consider whether I was using inspiration from her paintings I whether I was in fact appropriating her work.
