Shepard Fairey and the democracy of images

I stopped by Boston's Institute of Contemporary Art today to see the survey of L.A. graphic designer Shepard Fairey. I'll have more to say about the exhibition later, but for the moment I was struck by the sight of a tour group gathered in front of the now-famous campaign image of Barack Obama as a heroic portrait-bust on a pedestal composed from the word "hope."

For decades it has been common to see similar groups across town at the Museum of Fine Arts on the Fenway, looking at such Revolutionary-era subjects as John Singleton Copley's famous 18th century portraits of John Quincy Adams, Paul Revere and others. There, modestly but exquisitely portrayed as working citizens far different in demeanor from the aristocrats paraded in British Grand Manner portraiture, they are surrounded by period trappings in the museum's great Colonial American art collection. (The MFA will open more than 50 galleries in a new American art wing in 2010.) At the ICA, Obama is exalted by a passionate street artist in white-cube galleries inside a sleek new steel-and-glass building on the city's historic, gentrifying waterfront. It fits, just the way the MFA's portraits do.

As soon as I snapped the photo above, a guard rushed over to admonish me that photography is not allowed in the show. "I'm not using a flash," I replied. "Is that OK?" Nope, came the reply. "Must I obey?" I asked. "Yes," she answered, missing or -- more likely -- ignoring my too-cute-by-half reference to Fairey's trademark street-and-clothing campaign about authoritarian imagery, dubbed "Obey Giant."

The guard was perfectly cordial and just doing her job. But I couldn't help note the irony. A "no photographs" policy is in force in a show about an artist who is currently trading lawsuits over his guerrilla (meaning unauthorized) use of part of an Associated Press photographer's published picture of Obama. I'm supportive of artists' full participation in the "democracy of images" that seems to characterize our digital environment. I wonder what John Singleton Copley and John Quincy Adams would think?

-- Christopher Knight

Photo: Christopher Knight

Comments

[Staz]

Don't think for a second that Shepard supports fair use. Look up the threats he sent to Baxter Orr and others just last year when they made parody of his work. Shepard did not answer questions from the crowd during his talk at the ICA and the interviewer did not bother to focus on any hot topics concerning his career. The Obama poster is not the only allegeded infringement against Shepard. Shepard has put a price on revolutionary ideas that he does not practice himself. If he wants to spread the wealth of images he should allow people to parody his work without petty legal threats.

[Bob Lukomski]

Huh...
I remember the same thing happening to me when taking a picture in the Situationist International exhibit at the Boston ICA back in 1990. Same ironic thought passed through my mind as well.

[BW]

He is a hypocrite.
http://www.pittsburghcitypaper.ws/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A59932

[Bruce DeBoer]

Great story. Not a huge surprise for me. I wonder if one could take photos of a Richard Prince exhibit? My guess would be no.

[John Krill]

All museums now have a policy of no photography if the work on display is NOT property of the museum.

To test this go to LACMA Broad building and try photographing HIS property on diplay at MY museum.

[Lady Xoc]

Look, this is a graphic design issue more than anything. Why do they even have this guy in an art museum. The Obama poster took a news photo (I don't really care whether Manny Garcia or AP owns the rights) and turned it into a tired, sort of retro poster. He stole the image!. And, take a look at the "OBEY" part of Andre the Giant and tell me you don't see Barbara Kruger (another graphic designer) written all over it.

[Eric]

The ironies keep piling up. The AP, which has for years abused photographers' rights in unreasonable grabs of copyright at the expense of the people who make it possible for them to exist, claim it's theirs when it clearly is not.

Now this hypocrite of a graphic designer (artist he is not) insisting his work be protected. It's just too funny, and sad at the same time that such hypocrisy is supported by the art establishment - which undermines its own long-term viability for a quick buck.

What next? Copyright the irony before someone riffs on it!

[Peter Kwok]

In this age of relativism, the greatest sin is being a hypocrite by breaking your own rules. Shepard is no different than the gay bashers who got caught soliciting another male.

[justin]

I am not a fan of Shep Fairey, but in actuallity this probably has nothing to do with him. It is most Likely the policy of the museum, as someone else has already mentioned. In most museums you are permitted to take non-flash pictures of the work if the museum owns it, and if the museum does not own it, they do not permit photography. It is completely possible that Fairey would not mind someone taking a pic and the museum put forth the restrictions, or vice versa, but that is impossible to tell from the information in this article.
having said that, Shep Fairey is not that cool.