« Appropriation | Main | Question 3.4 »
March 24, 2004
Questions on appropriation
Ok here's my initial bunch of questions . . . there's issues I haven't covered here, which did come up in the chapter, but didn't make it through into my final bunch of notes . . .
The transition of forms and ideas between high and low culture, and the implications there could definitely be worth discussing.
Also, Keith, I thought you might be interested in the bit about conservative politics and appropriation?
1.1
Is Garretís work [as discussed in this chapter] inherently any better than the junk mail I received from my ISP?
1.2
Is it important that the original meaning of the 'thing' being appropriated is known by the receiver? [familiarity]
1.3
Is familiarity neccessary when dealing with Saville's album covers?
1.4
Is familiarity neccessary when dealing with Parody, such as the Twin Peaks guide-book?
2.1
Is appropriation more valid when it is used to bring up or develop new forms or ideas? [as opposed to simple literal pastiche. Eg: Swatch poster]
2.2
Does Saville's work rely solely on ambiguity to create the "3rd idea"? Could his work be criticised as being formulaic if this is the case?
2.3
Of the work illustrated in this chapter, which has the most 'added value', in terms of bringing something new to the appropriation? [or possibly that should be; getting something new out of the appropriation]
3.1
Who is more authentic:
Gary Cooper or Clint Eastwood?
Elvis Presley or Carl Perkins?
Art Chantry or Tibor Kalman?
3.2
Can anyone appropriate anything?
3.3
Is Kalman's work with the vernacular "patronizing"?
3.4
Is Chantry's really any better? Does he just fake naivety better than Kalman?
[note: might be worthwile looking up some more of Chantry's work]
Posted by Luke Wood at March 24, 2004 04:35 PM