Replies: 10 Comments
on Friday, June 15th, Raquel Sarangello said
Estafar..copiar...inspirarse...es tan fina la lÃnea del artista cuando esta creando
Lo importante es se HONESTO con uno mismo en la vida y en el trabajo Yo amo mi profesÃón por eso soy la primera en respetarla y respetarme, en honor a mis Ãntimas convicciones
on Monday, May 28th, Andrew said
The intangible, sacred value of art you speak of, particularly through the example you gave, is often in the forefront of my mind. What makes a work great? Possibly the arrogance, or the cunning, of those who would call it great, being in possession of the power to move public opinion.
on Saturday, May 26th, Kaleo said
Having looked at some of your work online, I can see why critics would relate your work to Bacon's. Commonalities include one or two figures in isolation in bare surroundings and smeared paint in his style.
However, no offence but while your work is technically skilled it does nothing for me. Bacon on the other hand is my favorite modern painter.
on Tuesday, May 22nd, nicholas forrest said
I think that it is great that the reviewers compared Alberto's work to Bacon although i do think that too much of a good thing can turn out to be negative. An artist would want to be recognised as unique and not always identified as the artist whose work is like Bacon's
on Tuesday, May 22nd, Ellen said
Alberto-
First allow me to say that your work IS great ("Bacon is among the greatest modern painters..."), although you are always modest in your assessment of your paintings. The continuous comparison to a "master" like Bacon may have been a blessing and/or a curse. I see the realm in which you exist with Bacon; however, the dimentions of that realm are vast. Sargent was always compared to Valesquez. No doubt about that influence, but the orginality of the end result is clearly unique. Sargent hardly painted heads of Philip or society people against those remarkable backdrops. Although Sargent had his own fabulous backgrounds. Sargent gave the knowledge his own personal twist. The point: Alberto, your work is surely unique and stands alone in its magnificence. The unfortunate Japanese "artist" could not stand alone, but needed the support of what I call the Xerox Mode of painting.
In my own work, I have reference of Zorn, Emile Carlsen, Ogden Pleisner,Frank Duveneck, etc., etc. And while I've copied pieces and sketched the Charles Dana Gibson line drawings repeatedly, I would hardly show them as my own (Who wears spats today?). However, I was extremely flattered when I recently sold a photograph to an individual who told me that my work was evocative of Robert Mapplethorpe's flowers. I did not see the connection until it was pointed out to me and I had not consciously studied Mapplethorpe's pieces prior to creating my images, although I am certainly aware of the body of work. As it happens, the person who bought my photograph of a cala lily is on the board of the Mapplethorpe Foundation. He acquired my photograph to hang among his personal collection of Mapplethorpe's in his home. A splendid compliment fo me, indeed.
Alberto, I offer no meaningless comparisons or empty flattery. Your work stands on its own. To forge your work may be a tribute, but sinful in its intent.
on Monday, May 21st, Mildred Lachman Chap said
Alberto: I won't comment on the issue of the Japanese artist's plagiarism, but I want to comment on your reviewers' likening your work to Bacon's. I know Bacon's work well. And I have just looked at yours. I see absolutely no connection. In my view you have described the message of his art pretty accurately. Your own is a world away. And the quality of his painting is gutsy, visceral, wild - despite being framed by the skills of a an elegant colorist and illustrator. Yours, in my opinion is soft, dreamy, vaporous, and in the more abstract, geometric work, very cerebral. I find it helpful when people respond to my work with care and precision...I hope you do too in my comment. This is the first time I have commented on a blog. Good luck! Millie
on Monday, May 21st, walt said
If no one knew Shakespears works but me and I copied them down and signed my own name does that make me a genius? This is essentially what the Japanese artist did assuming no one would find out who Alberto is. The copiest was not only not a genious but a fool. In this day and age nothing is kept secret. And yet he put his deceptions out in the public eye where anyone with a computer could see what had been done.
Yes of course we are all influenced by history. In our times we've all seen more art in our lifetime than the combined knowledge of previous and contemporary painting in the times of Michelangelo (who was certainly influenced by Greek art), Rembrandt and Cezanne who were both influenced by Italian art, Matisse and Picasso who were both influenced by various African and Middle Eastern art forms...it is all at our fingertips. That is why it becomes more and more important that a young artist pays attention to what has come before. The ignorant will assume that what is in their heads is their own by right of presence forgetting where they saw it and who did it the first time. Ignorance is bliss but it is rarely original at least in the beginning. Though sometimes a naive of great talent and intelligence comes along and eventually finds his natural voice.
But after seeing the copies this young man made from Alberto's work it is obvious he was not ignorarant of his source. He knew exactly what he was doing.
on Monday, May 21st, Mark said
We can not create in a vacume. Any one who even just looks at art will be moved in some way and those of us who do create art are often drawn in, in a way others are not to those artists we most admire. To paint without the influence of others to me can not happen. But there is often a fine line between those who are inspired by an artist and those who are so influenced that thier work may not be true to themselves. You can always tell those who let the influence control thier creativity and not the insperation.
Is a masterpeice less a masterpeice if it is a fraud, in my humble estimatrion, YES! If the work was copied as a lesson and then down the road it was thought to be a particular artist's work at no fault of the artist who made the copy, the work may be good and have merit for what it is, but if the work was pawned off as an original by the coping artists (fraud) then just by the lack of honor of the copier, no matter how good the work, it is no masterpiece as it was created in dishonesty. The copier is not only dishonest to those who view the work but also to the copier as well.
on Monday, May 21st, walt said
He might have invented a post modern deconstructionist justification for the copies. Not that I would have believed it but others would. It's been done before. But apparently he wasn't that smart.
The truth is that this episode should thrust Alberto's work forward in the minds of those who first judged the Japanese artist as genius and then those who took the award away should have given it to Alberto since in fact his were the original genius.
on Monday, May 21st, jose said
Alberto, we all go and feed on the art others, you know this better than I do and you put it quite well in this post. I know I do it, I know Beethoven did it [the Diabelli variations?], the impressionists and the cubists to name only those two trends, were great adepts of visiting each others works. What is lacking in these times, however, is integrity. I guess it has always been lacking but nowadays it’s very much in our faces. The world has shrunk and the Dr. Fausts of this world are unmasked much more easily. The devil doesn’t wait 14 years for their souls any more, he’s got the media helping him out too. The media, a blessing and a curse, wouldn’t you agree?
Now, are this Japanese fellow’s award-winning paintings lesser works because of what has been revealed? That is a tough one to answer. I have never seen your work ‘live’, or his for that matter. I cannot detect the texture of your painting’s ‘skin’, I cannot discern the stroke of your brush on these flat computer images. But I detect a theme, an atmosphere and a palette that is consistent and I readily identify with you [from what I have seen so far]. Can one say the same of this Japanese artist’s work? Does this series of paintings appear in some kind of rapport with what he has been researching and producing? [This is another tricky one because many people don’t see this as a necessity any more – I cant’ see how it could be otherwise, it would be like writing a novel without having a story to tell.] From what I have managed to see and read so far, I think not. I think this particular series he was awarded for came to him quite out of the blue. Copy/paste can be so much fun.
Getting back to Faust. Had this Japanese fellow not bargained on being found out when he sold his soul to the devil for his moment of fame; had he rather admitted to his admiration for your work and made mention of it, the paintings might have survived the blemish. He may have even still gotten the award. But in my view he failed miserably at copying/reworking you, and that is shameful not only for him but also for the judges.
The legacy of painting
If it was up to me to point out the difference in terms of content between my work and Bacon’s I would say that his painting depicts a tragically beautiful dimension, with a strong realist vision. 
I was amazed by this unprecedented event in the chronicle of scandals that have shaken the art world. 
