In response to this post, about a traffic-sign-subverted chair by Amy Pruzan, Ries Niemi wrote:
Sorry, I just can’t let this one slide- this chair is an almost direct
copy, right down to bends, shapes, and construction techniques, of the
chairs that my friend (and I say that because I am honored he calls me
a friend) Boris Bally has been making for close to 15 years now.Boris has been making all kinds of objects from street signs for longer than Amy Pruzan has been out of 9th grade. Ms. Pruzan may be a great artist, and other works of hers superb- I don’t know. But I do know this one is a knockoff.
No, Ries, I don’t think you can know that. It’s possible Pruzan thought of the idea on her own and proceeded without knowing about Bally’s production. Yes, Bally was first and remains best, but I think there’s room for Pruzan. I still like the skinny legs of her chair. They undercut the massive utterance of her seat.
Bally:
Bally:
Pruzan:
You know (directed at Reis) this whole who’s done what first and how and why is a little offensive. If art were divided along those lines, nothing would ever get done. Besides, don’t you think it would be more productive to have a private conversation with the artist rather than a public outcry of “first” if you really want to investigate?
I finished my last year of undergrad at Cornish with Amy, and as far as I remember (someone correct me if I’m wrong), she completed this piece while still in school and finding her voice. She’s a sincere, warm, and exceptionally bright individual, and I have no doubt this piece was playful and fun for her, and less about usurping some kind of Seattle old garde which doesn’t really exist anyway.
Besides, how many different ways are there to construct a chair out of street signs? You may as well try to patent a brush stroke.
Look, I want to make it clear I have nothing against Amy Pruzan, and I am not putting her other work down- but it is simply not credible to me that this chair sprung full blown into her mind.
Boris has been making those chairs since around the late 80’s. They have been in stores and galleries in every major city in America. Most big art museum gift shops have sold some of Boris’ street sign work sometime in the last 20 years.
It is not very likely that anyone who cares in the least about furniture, modern crafts, or art, has not seen some of his stuff somewhere, if you frequent museums in North America.
And Regina- you, yourself, often tell us how one artist or another “owns” a particular technique, subject matter, or style. While I dont believe that, I think that when you look at the similarities of these chairs, with the bent, angle legs, the folded edge tapered rectangle seat, and the material used, its hard not to think that Boris did this first, and better.
Maybe it really is a case of virgin birth- I would be interested to hear from Ms. Pruzan- but, having seen Boris work, I just fail to see how, as an artist, you would be interested in continuing to make something that was so similar to an established body of work.
I’m firmly in the camp of someone owning an idea. This is not to say that others cannot expand on that idea and then somehow put their own slant to it. It is possible that folks who struggle with originality might take offense to the concept of identity ownership but credit should go where credit is due.
Ries seems to be hopping onto both sides of the fence here while being protective of his freind who probably doesn’t need the help and to being against the idea that ownership of an idea is legitimate.
In a similar vein, my thoughts turned to Susan Robb this morning when on Artdish there was a posting by Dihgaut concerning the use of lightweight plastic garbage bags to create inflatable sculptures. Here is a youtube link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH6xCT2aTSo
So, who did it first, Joshua Allen Harris, or Susan Robb? And does it matter? And are they similar to the point that an ownership issue can be made?
I hope I’m not “off topic” on this one but the issue here is not whether Amy Pruzan is a warm and fuzzy person. Rather, this is a conversation about the fruits that come from the creative mind. It doesn’t seem ethical for someone else to simply stroll into their neighbor’s yard and pluck from his tree without permission or due recognition over where it came from.
Sharon- I am not sure where the “Seattle Old Garde” fits in- I left Seattle in 1984, and Boris is a Swiss trained Goldsmith from Pittsburgh who lives in Providence. His work is in the V&A, the Cooper Hewitt, the Renwick, the Mint, and the Carnegie Museums.
Seattle dont figure into this at all, except in its provincialism.
Heres the work I always think Ries copies for his pieces: http://www.outhousegraffiti.com/Crap1.jpg
Curses!
I have been discovered…
So I fully admit to being way off base about the Seattle garde thing — I had misinterpreted something, naturally.
As for provincialism, I guess I’m sort of weary of art being held up with other similar art in the question of who’s done what first and claiming one’s a knockoff; which seems most provincial of all, no matter what city you’re in.
To me, it’s far more interesting and productive to discuss art in comparison when we’re talking about shared history, base influence, off-shoots, and differences despite similarity. Isn’t that just a more *fun* conversation, anyway?
I care very much about art, and have frequented museums in many cities in North America, and had never seen Boris’s work before this post. (Or if I did see it, apparently I forgot about it.)
It is impossible for an artist to know about everything that’s been done before. Amy Pruzan had every right to make that piece. If there is a responsibility to acknowledge Boris’s work (as having come “first”), it lies with us and the way we talk about Pruzan’s work. Regardless of the artist’s possible intent to copy another artist’s work, we the viewers decide if it is worthy of attention.
In this case, I’m not sure why Regina decided to use Pruzan’s piece in the post instead of Boris’s.
Look, people. Ries has a point. Regina choses to post an image of a piece that his friend recognizes as done better and in greater depth by his friend. I don’t think he should have attacked the original artist. Maybe he should have attacked Regina for not knowing about Bally.