+Richard Prince, Untitled (Portrait), 2015
-Listed and sold as his, is it really his (reclaimed instagram post printed very clearly on canvas), Has enough been done to the work to justify it being his?? I think that the point of the work is to raise this question and in doing so justify it as being the work, the comment with the name does make this seem as if it has been justified!
+Marcel Duchamp, Fountain,1917
+Hannah Hoch, Das Schöne Machen, 1920 THESE ARE BOTH APPROPRIATION
— although it is altered she still wants the originals to be recognised (originals being the segments she used for collage)
+Richard Prince, Untitled (Cowboy), 1989
-Marlboro Advert — if it is th advert with no text is it possibly copyright/?
-by removing the text it becomes free an is no longer an advert
– image of American// image of masculinity
”By Generating what appears to be a double (or a ghost), it might be possible to represent what the original photograph or picture reimagined” Richard Prince,k I second that emortion, 1977-8
Personally more as a work of art by Prince than as a Marlboro advert, however there is an age gap in generations // e.g there are no longer adverts for cigarettes and they no longer have branded packaging.
*SEE Richard Prince, 8 Track Photograph, 1977-8
*Richard Prince, Nurse of greenmeadow,2002
– cover design of sonic nurse, ny sonic youth 2004
– initial work by Bamboo Ward (Noah Gordon)
-Is this work nostalgic? Is there something necessarily nostalgic in all appropriation?
-The nurse is a stereotype for ‘women/females’ also ‘blonde hair’
– what is nostalgia? As this is a fairly negative photo
*Frank Auerbach, Head go JYM,1981
+Glenn Brown, The day the world turned Auerbach, 1992 THESE TWO ARE VERY SIMILAR IN COLOUR AND TEXTURE DIFFERENCE
+Walker Evans, Alabama Tennant Farmers Wife, 1936
+Sherrie Levine, After Walker Evans 4, 1981
-see Sherrie Levine, statement, 1982
+Sherrie Levine, Aspens in Flagstaff, 2009
-How does reppition effect the work
+John Steazeker, Marriage, c2006-10