| | |
|
AnaCorrea-SecondPaper 3 - 31 Mar 2008 - Main.AnaCorrea
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | |
Introduction | |
<
< | I want to examine the tension between the rights of the owners and rights of the artists where the two disagree on the ultimate fate of the artwork. The Visual Arts Rights Act of 1990 (VARA) seemed to address this tension by attempting to protect rights of the creators over those of the acquirers, favoring the David artists over the Goliath property owners. Despite, and sometimes because of, VARA, however, recent court decisions have returned the power of destruction back to the fee holders. Of course, decisions such as these could reflect the greater political strength of property owners versus those of artists. As the plaintiff artist in Phillips v. Pembrooke Real Estate later observed: “It was probably very naive […] to think that artist rights would prevail over real estate and power." Perhaps, however, a more productive inquiry is dependent less on this discussion of power and more on one of the aesthetics, audience, and aim of the artwork. | >
> | I want to examine the tension between owner's rights and artist's rights where the two disagree on the ultimate fate of the artwork. The Visual Arts Rights Act of 1990 (VARA) seemed to address this tension by attempting to protect rights of the creators over those of the acquirers, favoring the David artists over the Goliath property owners. Despite, and sometimes because of, VARA, however, recent court decisions have returned the power of destruction back to the fee holders. Of course, decisions such as these could reflect the greater political strength of property owners versus those of artists. As the plaintiff artist in Phillips v. Pembrooke Real Estate later observed: “It was probably very naive […] to think that artist rights would prevail over real estate and power." Perhaps, however, a more productive inquiry is dependent less on this discussion of power and more on one of the aesthetics, audience, and aim of the artwork. | | | Aesthetics | |
<
< | If beauty is in the eye of the beholder what happens when the beholder changes her mind about the beautiful object. Does it cease to be beautiful? Some would say that an object’s beauty is independent of its audience. Something is either beautiful or not. | >
> | If beauty is in the eye of the beholder what happens when the beholder changes her mind about the beautiful object in question? Does it cease to be beautiful? An objective aesthetic theory would dictate that an object's beauty is independent of its audience. Human perception plays no part in whether something is beautiful or not.
Aesthetics seems out of place in the discussion of a statute like VARA that purports to protect art, whether “beautiful” or “ugly.” | | | Audience |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |