Comments on: lichtenstein's comics

lichtenstein's comics

vacapinta — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 00:12:50 -0800

Deconstructing Roy Lichtenstein (image heavy page). It has been noted, in a current exhibition, that "Lichtenstein drew visual material from a wide range of sources, from comic books to art history. His revisions of this material often drastically altered its original meaning" Did they? David Barsalou has spent the last 25 years going through over 30,000 comics to find those originals. (via papelcontinuo)

By: planetkyoto

planetkyoto — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 02:53:11 -0800

Good link, interesting to see that he was just presenting many of the comics as is or slightly simplified. Same old stuff + new context = high art. Also interesting to see the source for something I looked at many times before. I just happened to be in Osaka today in a neighborhood where I used to work, and walked past this building with a giant Roy Lichtenstein covering several floors of the north side.

By: snez

snez — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 04:00:23 -0800

I don't know if he "drastically altered its original meaning" as much as took the original images out of context forcing the spectator to provide their own back story/narrative. He did clean up some of them very nicely . I haven't decided yet how much this has changed my appreciation of Lichtenstein or if I've transferred my appreciation to the original comic book artists. I had thought he had altered them more. Thanks for the link - the perfect thing to ponder as I go to bed.

By: jfuller

jfuller — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 06:13:16 -0800

"Ninety percent of all art is imitation of other art." - H. L. Mencken

By: Outlawyr

Outlawyr — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 07:02:18 -0800

To an extent he is selecting and abstracting, and to an extent he is altering. The result is a nice question/statement about art and is also art itself.

By: Stynxno

Stynxno — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 07:26:51 -0800

amazing stuff, i was wondering when someone was going to do this. thanx for the link!

By: Postroad

Postroad — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 08:07:24 -0800

Personal note: I had worked with Roy L. at a college in N.J.--I used to laugh at the stuff he did. One day he drove up to the building where courses where held in a brand new Porsche...Short time later, he gave up teaching to work full time at his art. I continue to drive a cheapshit old car.

By: picea

picea — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 08:08:18 -0800

I think Lichtenstein's works did alter the meanings, because they were one frame shown out of the original context. Weird lines like '-flatten sand fleas!' become very weird indeed. What's really interesting to me is how I'd say 95% of the original images were drawn with more skill and impact than Lichtenstein's duplicates. He doesn't abstract the images that significantly, and it's often just a matter of removing some sketchy shading. Sometimes his copying is just plain bad, to the point where I question his skills as a draftsman, though I realise the way he duplicated the images was often elaborate and time-consuming. I don't know that it's the website author's intent, but I came away respecting Lichtenstein less and the pulp artists he uses as sources more. I wonder what the artists he lifted imagery from think of his work?

By: whatnot

whatnot — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 10:44:44 -0800

thanks for this.

By: Grod

Grod — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:09:59 -0800

[what picea said] and, [this is good]

By: 88robots

88robots — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:23:04 -0800

Incidentally, Irv Novick--who was Lichtenstein's supervising officer during World War II, and from whose comics work Lichtenstein got a LOT of the images he used in his paintings--passed away just this past week, at the age of 88.

By: vacapinta

vacapinta — Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:07:04 -0800

Alternate link (Coral. The original site seems to be down now)