You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The Author's problem on Steemit - short guide - /// I problemi dell'Autore su Steemit - breve guida

in #ntopaz6 years ago (edited)

Yeah... I come from an academic background, where cribbing and borrowing are dealt with harshly, so it always shocks me when folks draw or paint licensed characters and then publish them as original content. I get it---YOU drew this character so it feels like it's your work... And I frequently do interpretations of Pacman ghosts and similar figures myself, but there is a difference between making a satirical retooling or a take-off on a well known visual theme and just copying. Basquiat and Shakespeare created interpretations of well known works, but an artist or author needs to put enough of themself into the new version to make it an original work, not just a bad (or great) copy...

I appreciate that Steem respects artists' and authors' rights to their work, and the community expects the contributors here to do the same. Plagiarism doesn't fly! But it can also be frightening to put your own work out there where people might say it sucks or (even worse) ignore it completely---but that's the game, right? You share what you've written or drawn or painted or photographed, and if other folks enjoy it, great! You get upvotes... But getting upvotes by "borrowing" other people's content just ain't cool...

Sort:  

You have done an excellent analysis, thorough and of great culture.
As for interpreting or referring to a work of art, I agree with you.
New works can be created, but they must have a different substance that is conceptually revolutionary, as Wharol did. Many great artists have a cultural background that allows them to take models and distort them from their social, political and natural context.
I only speak of those who copy and do exercises using photographs of other artists, not free.
Great comment and a hug full of hope @richardfyates
Armando