click for pop-ups
[continued from Part 1, 1/11/07]
There's been some ranting going on over at NYC art blog, (see both post and comments section), in "John Currin Revisited," which is much ado about nothing, or rather, pretty much about the unremarkable fact that Currin's sources are a) found photographs of b) [vintage Danish] porn (re: his recent exhibition at Gagosian in December). The discussion too is unremarkable, and I wouldn't cite it here except for the fact that it contains fabulous examples (and a link!) of the Danish porn shots that Currin used as sources (see above, below).
I'm not at all certain if Currin's paintings are worth defending; what I am certain of, however, is that these folks' indignation about "copying" is based on some pretty hackneyed notions about "originality"...
...for further ado, please see the previous post on Jonathan Lethem and Open Source, or better yet, read his recent article on "plagiarism" in the Feb. issue of Harper's: "The Ecstasy of Influence."
click for pop-ups
More about "influences" and sourcing via the November '06 New York Magazine interview w/ Karen Rosenberg: "Influences: John Currin":
You also like to work from old photographic sources. Where do you find some of this stuff?
It first happened by accident. Somebody gave me three boxes of old Playboys from the seventies. The ads in those days were just better. Lately I've pulled some things off the Internet, old Danish porn. The crappier my source material, the more it frees me up. [...]
