dramatically
flickering repeatable
afterimages
Warhol neither rips off nor transcends his sources.
He retains them as flickering, repeatable afterimages while dramatically changing their pictorial appearance and effect.
That’s what turns “something not his into something all his own.”
Warhol’s slightly off kilter, Day-Glo brilliant pictures change the way we look at celebrity and consumer culture.
His work, at its best, transforms us.
From The Supreme Court Is Wrong About Andy Warhol, a Guest Essay in the New York Times on June 5, 2023. by Richard Meyer.
Mr. Meyer is a professor of art history at Stanford University and the author, most recently, of “Master of the Two Left Feet: Morris Hirshfield Rediscovered.”
Mr. Meyer writes that, “As an art historian and Warhol scholar, I was asked to write an amicus brief on behalf of the Foundation.“
Mr. Meyer also said, “There is much about Warhol and the question of originality, however, that I left out of my brief.“
I am reminded of the story of a friend of Ansel Adams who had come into possession of some original photographic prints by, I think, Paul Stand.
The friend gave the prints to a an Art Museum and took a huge tax credit for his gift.
The IRS questioned the claim and asked for some provenance on who this Paul Strand was and why this prints could be valued so highly.
The friend asked Ansel Adams to write a reply.
Based what Mr. Adams wrote, the claim was allowed and word was passed along from the IRS to thank Mr. Adams for his 10 page document explaining the life and work and value of Paul Strand.