[Moshe]

http://www.wmagazine.com/story/richa...m-in-hot-water

[PLips]

He should claim he farted on the photo before he posted it so that there was significant alteration from the original. So dumb

So this guy Prince has a crush on Kim and he used someone else's photo to win over a hashtag? And now he's getting sued??? MegaDOUCHE alert. Kim's loving the free douche too. It's win-win for her.

[pepper_green]

dis prince nigga fugly as fuc. nigga be lookin like be he hittin dat rock.

[PLips]

I get what happened. So much of celebrity fanbase is people who enjoy their art without idolizing the celebrity; and the others are sycophants who hang onto every word and yearn for the smallest crumb of connection to feel their adoration validated.

I've been through the gears over this bizzaro mystic or occult fandom. Fucking wierd as fuck.

The Ween Facebook is completely sycophantic and Dean Ween is totally using it to his advantage for marketing and fundraising. It's like a Lawrence Welk show, extremely douchey, harmless yet really fucking obnoxious. Total opposite of original Ween Forum.

Sometimes in my schizophrenia I imagine I was Kim Gordon's boyfriend 5000 years ago yet in this life time I strongly identify her as the Cool Mom archetype. I have the urge to call her mother if I ever met her in person, yet it's extremely unprofessional.

I'm certain Kim Gordon is the reigning Queen of Rock, Courtney Love is some pop mockup Kim created for a front so she can stay cool.

So you gotta treat her like a queen, if you're gonna crush make sure it's top notch pro affection without photoop hashtag, and give the woman some damned space! That goes for all musicians and entertainers.

[tesla69]

Originally Posted by PLips

So this guy Prince has a crush on Kim and he used someone else's photo to win over a hashtag? And now he's getting sued??? MegaDOUCHE alert. Kim's loving the free douche too. It's win-win for her.

Kim is not suing, it is the original photographer and copyright holder who owns the rights to the photograph that is suing.

Maybe this was an interesting idea in 1975, but 40 years later it just appears he's copying other people's work and putting his name on it.

Look, he just crops the original:
http://theartnewspaper.com/news/rich...ued-yet-again/

The bar for 'art' keeps getting lower and lower, doesn't it.

[Rob Instigator]

the stupid FUCK is the artists who is suing who does not understand the use of Instagram, which is a publication just like any other, and once your art or photos are on it or any other publication/distribution method (magazines, newspapers, websites), they are available for "fair use" by any artist anywhere to do whatever they fucking want with it.

Richard Prince is a genius at this stuff. He knows the art "world" is a fabrication as unreal as any religion.

[Rob Instigator]

it is all "Art." how is a photo of Kim in a mag "art" and a cropped version of that photo displayed as an Instagram message not "art?"

[tesla69]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

the stupid FUCK is the artists who is suing who does not understand the use of Instagram, which is a publication just like any other, and once your art or photos are on it or any other publication/distribution method (magazines, newspapers, websites), they are available for "fair use" by any artist anywhere to do whatever they fucking want with it.

Richard Prince is a genius at this stuff. He knows the art "world" is a fabrication as unreal as any religion.

Point taken about instagram, I'm just jealous I can't sell other people's pictures for $90,000.

[Rob Instigator]

art world is all about name brand, just like anything else.

[scott v]

And that's why IMO these are probably the worst of Richard Prince's works.
So maybe its a brilliant IDEA, but conceptually its BULLSHIT.
The real laugh is someone is paying for this, and I guess Prince is the one laughing in the end... until the "right" lawyer pulls the rug out under him.

[Genteel Death]

Originally Posted by scott v

but conceptually its BULLSHIT.

Precisely. Even as a concept it should remain within the territory of social media and never make it into ''serious'' creativity territory. By serious I mean work with a narrative and intent to fall back on which is not so tied with what is and remains lazy image creation for superficial consumption. This sort of thing sure has its place and reason to exist but what irritates me is that Richard Prince and Kim Gordon must be convinced we should give it more serious thought than it deserves. It may be fun and make you think that you are challenging the lack of potential for understanding conceptual art your potential audience is a victim of, but in reality you are being condescending of people you have never even heard of and automatically assume should know better. I doubt spending your time wondering about this sort of shit ends up being more than an exercise on thinking about creating something, rather than riding on the crest of producing work you love creating. Manipulation of celebrities and the way they are perceived as thought-provoking work. The year is 2016, not 1987.

[PLips]

As a starving academic artist this is kinda a mockery on skilled craftsmanship.

Based on artistic merit, it is a suggestion of the Infinite, like putting two mirrors across from eachother and seeing the picture in a picture in a picture... as the original artist photod Kim, Prince photod the photo, and in the article it shows Kim holding a photo of the twitter post of the photo.

Mel Brooks achieved this best in living memory, with 'The Producers'. Which was a movie about a musical, which actually became a Broadway musical, and then on a Season of 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' documented Brooks producing The Producers starring Larry David and David Schwimmer as Blume and Bialystock, the Producers.

Kim, get Mel Brooks on the phone! You're about to solve the parabolum!

[Rob Instigator]

I agree the value of the "art" is nil