In the introduction, its immediatley stated that since the invention of photography in 1839, it has caused controversy, debates, legal proceedings and sensational trials.
The right to photography, by Daniel Girardin
- It is stated that photographs are the source of endless debates and conflicts that often end up in court - i find this statement very bold as it is only looking at prehaps more extreme art, personal to certain artists that is made to cause a stir and some contrversy. It is forgotton that some art is made just for its beauty with no real meaning behind it other than maybe emotions, this type of work is impossible to cause debate, and could only simply create opinion on the work.
- Laws, attitudes and the limits of what is acceptable in terms of representations varies from ones country or culture to another. - this is a very good point, an effective example of this would be the case of, Guillermo Vargas Habacuc, where he found a stray dog tied it up in a gallery and put a bowl of water and food just out of its reach. Stray dogs are very common in his country, but often not in others, so other countries found this more of a devestating piece of 'art'. In his defence, he says that people walk past these stray dogs everyday and nothing is thought of it, but as soon as you stick them in a gallery for people to see people notice the dogs and what is being done to them, i think his work got his point accross
- Certain laws are not enforced as the no longer correspond to practice, whereas others evolve as a result of the courts decision. Photographs that have been published for many years can be forbidden, while others begin to circulate freely after a long period underground. It is all a question of how the picture is interpreted, of the meaning the is read into them- i am intergued as to how and who read thes images, as so many peple have different views and interpretations of art it seems an impossible task to decide whether one if right or wrong to be seen.
- Its stated in other words that, since the apparant invention of photography, artists have have to fight for their work to get acknowledged, then fight for the protection of copyright, then fight to say their work was acceptable and the meaning behind it. It seems every process was a struggle as photography was new and maybe the thought of the dramatic change scared people in that time period.
- Later in the text my answer on how an image is interpreted is answered- A photograph is interpreted due to the cultural conventions associated with its creation or distribution. Reading an image in this way is something each individual does in accordance with his personal moral or philosophical convictions. It is also wha a society as a whole does by referring to the laws and ethics that form the foundation of a particular culture. The conventions of representation change at the same time as the techniques used for the creation or distribution of photgraphs.
- Main cases that have been sent to court have lead to the censuring of images and their prohibition reveals that the issues involved are associated with money, politics, morality or sexuality.
- Money? Nowadays photographic collections and archives of 19th and 20th century work have become financial and historical treasure troves.
- When a conflict becomes a controversy, it is an indication of attitudes and sources of tension in a society at a particular moment. A controversy is like a mirror in which the convictions of a community at that time become visible.
- The article then goes onto to talk about a series of cases that have causes controveries. For example, the Gross case, Brooke Shields was photographed at age 13 naked with her mothers consent and signature given to the photographer, the image was then shown in various publications and places. As Brooke grew older she no longer wished for the photo to be shown so took it to court, she was told that she was binded the her mothers signature, then appealed and won, however it was a 2 year long court battle and it ended in 1992 with an artist called Richard prince who brought the rights to use and reproduce the image of Brooke, and it ended up being sold at Christies in 1999 for $151,000. - This sort of case who be hard to judge in court, as you would have all the legal elements such as the mothers signature binding her into the contract, unabling her from being able to stop the artists from using it. But then her rights should be taken into consideration, the fact she was just 13 when they were taken, and she appealed when she was older showed should have the fact that she was more aware of what was going on and the effect it could have at this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment