Greg Simkins(click image for larger version)
Alex Kirwan(click image for larger version)
Last February, Los Angeles-based Gallery Nineteen Eighty-Eight opened their "Remixing the Magic: 50 Artists Reinterpret Disney Classics" exhibit (photos courtesy of Vinyl Pulse,) another entry in their series of themed group exhibits. It is, in a word, awesome. The list of contributors is comprised of an equal mix of underground pop artists (Jose Emroca Flores, Luke Chueh, Tim Biskup) and contemporary animation artists (Katie Rice, Alex Kirwan.) I'm particularly fond of Kirwan's homage to Ub Iwerks and his classic dancing-skeleton cartoons (pictured above,) and Greg Simkins' deliciously malevolent, yet somehow spot-on, tributes to Pinocchio and Disney's golden age.
While I'm hoping that "Remixing the Magic" gets the same treatment as their "I AM 8-BIT" group exhibit and is eventually released in book form, I'm not altogether optimistic, primarily because Disney has a virtual copyright stranglehold on their mascots. If the collection is ever published, chances are Disney will want to be involved in everything from layout design to distribution, and while this may result in wider availability and greater exposure for many of these artists (which would be far from awful,) it would also mean that Gallery Nineteen Eighty-Eight would play a much-reduced role and may in fact be cut out of the process altogether. It has been pointed out elsewhere that these artists are reclaiming what essentially, these days, amount to corporate logos, but which were once symbolic of the wonderful, whimsical power of the animation of our childhoods.
It's a ballsy move, especially in a cultural environment where copyright law has been so blown out of proportion that accidental violators are dragged into court and sued for hundreds of thousands of dollars. And it brings up the question, "Does an artist's visual style constitute parody in and of itself, thereby freeing it from litigation under the fair use doctrine? Or is any drawing of Mickey Mouse a potential infringement?"
While I'm hoping that "Remixing the Magic" gets the same treatment as their "I AM 8-BIT" group exhibit and is eventually released in book form, I'm not altogether optimistic, primarily because Disney has a virtual copyright stranglehold on their mascots. If the collection is ever published, chances are Disney will want to be involved in everything from layout design to distribution, and while this may result in wider availability and greater exposure for many of these artists (which would be far from awful,) it would also mean that Gallery Nineteen Eighty-Eight would play a much-reduced role and may in fact be cut out of the process altogether. It has been pointed out elsewhere that these artists are reclaiming what essentially, these days, amount to corporate logos, but which were once symbolic of the wonderful, whimsical power of the animation of our childhoods.
It's a ballsy move, especially in a cultural environment where copyright law has been so blown out of proportion that accidental violators are dragged into court and sued for hundreds of thousands of dollars. And it brings up the question, "Does an artist's visual style constitute parody in and of itself, thereby freeing it from litigation under the fair use doctrine? Or is any drawing of Mickey Mouse a potential infringement?"
No comments:
Post a Comment