Communityportal
From RARIN Wiki
[edit] PEOPLE & ISSUES...
[edit] ISSUE 1: FAIR USE & ARTIST RIGHTS AGENCIES
Call me, I wish to fuck, a call free :)) my tel: +38.093.5383492 Call to me right now or "sms" :))
[edit] ISSUE 2: THE FUTURE OF SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING (AND THE FEES MUSEUMS CHARGE FOR IMAGES)
[edit] DISCUSSION (ISSUE 2) - post your comments here
[edit] ISSUE 3: FILMING IN THE GALLERIES
Dear RARIN,
We are having an education film being shot at our museum (How to behave in an art museum).
Our communication department has agreed that the crew can film in our New Acquisitions exhibition. Some of the works we do not have Rights and Reproduction. Does filming fall into Fair use?
Naomi Patterson Assistant Registrar Miami Art Museum 101 West Flagler Street Miami, Florida 33130 T. 305 375 5699 / 305 375 1141 F. 305 375 1725 npatterson@miamiartmuseum.org www.miamiartmuseum.org
[edit] DISCUSSION (ISSUE 3) - post your comments here
[edit] ISSUE 4: PAINTER, CHAPMAN KELLEY vs. CHICAGO PARK DISTRICT (Visual Artists Rights federal appeal case)
Painter, Chapman Kelley vs. Chicago Park District (Visual Artists Rights federal appeal case)
Setting the Stage: The Chicago Wildflower Works was a sculpture of native flowers, gravel, and steel Kelley had created, with the approval and agreement of the Chicago Park District. Kelley financed installation of the sculpture, and under his direction it was tended by volunteers for over two decades. He is widely recognized for this artistic effort, including by such institutions as the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University; Boston Museum; The Schools of Art and Architecture, Yale University; the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts; and the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, among others. The Chicago Wildflower Works was located on 68,000 square feet in Chicago's lakeside Grant Park.
from Chapman Kelley's website (on artist rights): [1]
from The Art Newspaper: [2]
from Chicago IP Litigation Blog: [3]
article in the Chicago Reader: [4]
from The Art Law Blog: [5]
link to Chicago Park District's reply brief - June 24, 2009: [6]
The Rebecca Stringer Show - Dallas/Ft. Worth - interview with Kelley - 3 part video sequence: [7]
also see "Artists Rights" in Section VII for an interesting thesis on museums and artists rights
[edit] DISCUSSION (ISSUE 4) - post your comments here
Response 1:
May 10, 2009
After seeing a photograph of the public artwork the Chicago Wildflower Works (CWW) and its creator Chapman Kelley during a Chicago media blitz about it in the 1980's, I visited the installation and found the artist mingling with the public and answering their questions, including mine.
As a result of successful blooming seasons the CWW garnered national and international attention. For the next two decades the CWW’s design of having successive blooms throughout the season was reached. At the same time, the CWW thrived solely on rainwater and used no fertilizer nor insecticides.
So powerful was that first interaction with Kelley and his work, that nearly 20 years later–after learning of the work’s alteration without the artist’s permission–I had no second thoughts about immediately volunteering to assist with getting for Kelley the artistic justice he and his work deserved.
The Opening Brief main appeal was filed on April 13, 2009. It can be accessed on Scribd.com or here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/14288104/Chapman-Kelley-Opening-Brief-in-the-7th-Cir-April-13-2009
The Rights & Reproduction Information Network is to be commended for bringing this important artists’ rights issue before the public through this community portal.
Sincerely,
John Viramontes founding member Council for Artists Rights
Response 2:
May 16, 2009
Chapman Kelley was a great mentor to me when I was a young artist back in the 1980's. He recruited me to do some temporary work as an assistant on his Wildflower Art Installation in Chicago's Grant Park, (a great inspiration for what was otherwise a dismal resume for a young creative person.) He introduced me to the wife of Picasso, Chicago arts patron Hope McCormick, and others. He embraced the small international art movement that I was apart of at the time, even if we were to eventually drift apart, because he has always encouraged others to be creative and work toward their dreams. The other is essencial to what is so big in Chapman Kelley's work. Though his paintings were conservative to me just seen as wildflowers, his art installation imbued transferred meaning to them, making them more radical than just paintings, and vice versa. Some of that meaning has now been shaved off, and that is unfortunate. It is a good example of how culture does not exist in a vacuum. Obviously some in the legal community understand that meaning is found through context, while some don't. It is my hope that there could be Chapman Kelley Wildflower Installations in all American cities, like a new flowering of Carnegie Libraries, and I hope that as part of the ultimate legal settlement, that may be an outcome. Perhaps some of us should start thinking about that now? Would that not inspire all peoples, and help set our course for a new green-hungry century? Such could alchemize what was an unfortunate and mindless act of destruction of art and culture by the City Of Chicago into a new meaning, which is positive, long lasting, and enhances the legacy of Chapman Kelley's work and foresight. I urge The City Of Chicago to collaborate on a legal settlement which is this big in scope, or for the courts to re-hear this case.
Ken Boe
Miami Art Works 509 W. Sullivan Street Miami AZ 85539
http://www.kenboe.com http://www.myspace.com/kenboe
Response 3:
May 17, 2009
We all need our rights but somehow the pendulum has swung way too far in the direction of the institution and in this case the City of Chicago Parks Department. I've been following this case in the Chicago newspapers/radio since it was made public a couple years ago. It remains almost unbelievable to me that this distinguished professional artist could be so badly treated by the very municipality he so brilliantly served for many years. Even some museums have evolved in such a way as to almost exclusively embrace wealthy art entrepreneurs/collectors and other elites rather than involving the artistic community in meaningful ways. My local museum (The Art Institute of Chicago) which offers three hours per week free admission is run more like a private club for the rich and powerful than a public institution. We would all profit if the artist were more appreciated and involved in our culture.
G. L. Smith,
MD Long Beach, IN
Response 4:
June 3, 2009
What the City did to Chapman Kelley's work is an outrage.
When my wife and I moved to Chicago in 1985, one of our pleasures that first summer was to peer down from our apartment overlooking Grant Park and see the changing colors of the wildflower garden below. The following spring, I volunteered to help the weeding and pruning of the garden and got to meet Chapman. He was selfless and generous with his time and knowledge. Eventually, I joined the friends of the wildflower garden group and met some wonderful people, all of whom cared deeply for the wonderful art that the wildflower garden provided. Of course, there were some folks who complained that the wildflower garden was nothing but a bunch of weeds. Chapman patiently explained to them that what many people referred to as weeds were actually the only flowers that were native to this area and that, as a result, they blossomed throughout the spring, summer and fall, and required only rain to thrive. The first time the city tried to interfere with the garden, we brought a law suit against the city and, eventually, they gave up their efforts to get rid of the wildflower garden. For years after we left Chicago, we made a point to visit the wildflower garden on every visit to Chicago. It always brought a smile to our face to walk around the large ovals and take a closer look at the flowers and related wildlife that it attracted, rabbits, birds, butterflies, etc. A true oasis in the midst of the city. When we moved back to Chicago in 2005, we noticed on one of our visits that the wildflower gardens were gone, and, instead they had planted some squares with shrubs and had removed many of the wildflowers. We were disappointed but did not know what happened until we ran into Chapman months after moving here. We followed the law suit and were further disappointed when the judge callously and ignorantly failed to give garden its due and recompense Chapman for his loss. I hope the appellate court rectifies this outrage.
