woman as decoration (so what else is new?)
i have been trying to find the portfolio from which these images are taken for years, and, you guessed it: they're at the Wolf- sonian! all of the images are by our old friend, julius klinger, and one we've featured before. that's now two, with the hoytema calendars, searches laid to rest. but now that i see them all i'm somewhat troubled; do we duplicate too easily? do we grimace and prance as our natural practices?
i'm starting to wonder if my values aren't keeping up with the times. i'm also wondering if i'm a hypocrite. i have a google alert set up for the word japonisme, so whenever it's used online i get pointed in its direction.
i'm starting to wonder if my values aren't keeping up with the times. i'm also wondering if i'm a hypocrite. i have a google alert set up for the word japonisme, so whenever it's used online i get pointed in its direction.
for some time now, images from this blog have shown up on tumbler, but that site seems assiduously, somehow, to make sure every images is linked, one way or another, back to its source. enter pinterest, and the whole system falls apart. users link to tumbler rather than here, for one thing, or they just download images from here and assign themselves as the source.
i seem to have gotten myself really all tangled up with myself over this. then the pinterest users repin each other's pins, and soon any hint of source is non-existent. and i ask myself, given that there's nothing that can be done about it, 'should i care?'.
i know that it bothers me in part because i see things that i know required hours of work to make them appear effortlessly beautiful. but i also begin to wonder if that kind of 'ownership' in this kind of context has any meaning anymore.
add to that, i haven't always been perfect at attributing sources, so does that make me no different? i get email occasionally asking why don't i just use tumbler, as if it's getting to be that context, even any text, grows more meaningless every day as the image increas- ingly becomes all that matters.
once, back in the day, in the hippie commune where i was living in the haight-ashbury, some guy off the street (friend of a friend?) walked into my room, went through my drawers, found my little water-painting set, and began to paint. when i found him and objected, he told me i was too attached to ownership of physical things. was i a bad hippie? this is like that.
though am i any different? i spend all this time writing this stuff, and rarely read the text on other blogs. sure, i want my blog to be read, as does every blogger who puts in time, sometimes quite a bit, to write copy and context. and yet, how often do i just look at the pictures? heck, i have a whole wall of books on this subject, and how many of those have i read? i've looked at the pictures.
and isn't it a good thing, that so many people know about japonisme now (bunches of boards on pinterest! -- lots with my images)? i remember not so long ago when nobody had ever heard of gustave baumann or arthur wesley dow, let alone mabel royds ... or julius klinger. and yet i simmer and stew, as though the pixels were still part of my fingertips, and now dispersing into the ether.
Labels: julius klinger
21 Comments:
Please don't hate me, but you know where else you can find these images? Dover published a slim book of Klinger's images. It's a great collection. I'm loving the Wolfsonian.
Lily,
I like the story about being a bad hippie...I guess any community has got its set of norms, so in a away many hippies were conservative, too. But the question of art and ownership is interesting, indeed. I sometimes wonder what will happen to my prints when I'm not there any more. In a way I like the idea that they will be hanging on somebody else's wall, me being only a state of transition. Culture also connects us to past and future generations, doesn't it?
Klaus
The most valuable contribution we can make is a perspective, a take on this madness we find ourselves in. The vision and perspective you cultivate and share with us in your personal way is one of my most anticipated feeds.
I must say that I really enjoy reading your words (and looking at the pictures).
yeah, evan -- thanks. i did come across that too, but have you seen it? do they have the whole pages still together? the cover looks like not, buti do know that they often just reprint from the old plates or like that.
klaus -- hmmm -- your wonderful comment has me sitting back to think. this is one of those moments one only very occasionally comes across in life when one has the choice between learning something or feeling miserable: to be thought of as a scenic route and not a destination....
thank you uk, that's a very helpful perspective and makes perfect sense. and many thanks for your kind words about my writings here too -- which i guess are, now that i think of it, doing the same for me in the writing it.
I have the Dover Julius Klinger book. Great as a reference, and the plates you published & the plates in the book look the same...but it's Dover, & I've never seen the originals, so back to my comment as a reference...
...on the matter of ownership. Um, no, you don't own the images you post, anymore than a teacher owns the subject he/she teaches. What is unique about your blog is the combination of text & insight that accompanies the images (though sometimes I'm pretty retarded- oh!!! pretty pictures!!!!- was there text?). I've learned as much & more here than I could ever to hope to learn from a college class on the same subject, because while a class is finite, here there's always new discoveries. I have 100s of images I've downloaded from here. I'll never re-post them (they're mine now, all mine!!!!...no)- I use then for reference.
Love the "bad hippie" story...people like that drive me bat-shit crazy...."too attached to physical ownership of things" as a means of somehow turning the fact he had no effing manners back on you.
ps. regarding the J.K. portfolio- Wolfsonian vs Dover...the Dover colors generally are greyed out a little. Some of the plates @ Wolfsonian have color that's much brighter- say, royal blue in the original, & more of a grey blue in the Dover...otherwise all that's missing from the Dover is the small illustration on the back of the portfolio. I suspect the big difference is the fact that the Dover illustrations are printed on glossy stock, I doubt that'd be true of the original.
thanks for the confirmation(s), evan. one thing i've noticed at the wolf is the really quality work their photographers have done -- beautiful color and clarity.
that being said, i have seen these images in variations of color.
and thanks much, as usual, for your supportive comments.
I find the loss of attribution frustrating too as a reader. I often follow images back from blog to source, learning more as I go along. Now, often a beautiful image is bereft of its information. So aside from the issues of infringement and improper crediting of work, knowledge is lost as well. I do think you should mind. We all do.
thanks to you too, bf, for your supportive & understanding words. late yesterday afternoon i realized there was something i needed to do, despite it being a little scary. i needed to tell the "main offender" how hurt and bad i felt, and ask her why she did that. haven't heard back yet. will report.
it just occurred to me that this reminds me of the governor of wisconcin winning his recall; the booming peal of the bell of things to come.
where is bob dylan now when we need him?
Dear Lily - Not wishing anything ill, I think Bad Hippie would be a pretty good thing to have on one's gravestone. As for the sense of information being stolen, my view is that information is there to be shared. Especially in this modern world of cyber-information, people will take what you offer, often then re-post either images or text or both and claim them as their own, and there is nothing you can or should do about it. We have been reborn into a post-copyright era, as if we were all back in an oral culture where ownership of information is an alien concept. So the only decision we have to make is to share or not to share.
neil, so nice to see you. and you've put a wry smile on my face.
i guess the flip side is that galleries and libraries and museums all over the world are putting their collections online, which essentially gives open access. (though some that had open visuals in the past are now closed to access, like the Deutche History Museum's collection of posters, some of which i've been able to find nowhere else.)
when the snow at the top begins to melt, the rivers and streams and creeks and rivulets all begin to swell with water.
Images are simply that - images. What you bring to the table, in terms of explanation, intimacy,and interpretation,is entirely another (and far more fascinating, subject.
wow... that's really nice of you to say. i think that somehow i'm confused about all this myself. for someone who has cluelessly announced herself as someone who *knows* (and implied -- is on the right side of) the difference between image and substance, i've sure had to update my self-image.
i think it's hard for me both to be and not to be taken seriously. let the images speak for me; anyone who denys their truth i can easily dismiss.
it's not that i don't feel equally strongly about both words and images here; but i wasn't sure about all of you.
I agree about all of it all sides. Your blog is you and it is yours. Most images are in the public domain. IF NOT please say so.
The internet is just another medium that presents images but all images are a distortion. Images whether 20 feet high in the classroom or 4 inch square here or something else in the public domain - none of them ARE the work of art. We have no idea what they may look like if we could see them in person - but WE CAN'T - so we gobble up all the images we can find.
I'm not an old hippie but an old art history major -provenance, artist, date and medium are essential to appreciating a work of art. Since your site is mostly woodcuts and prints and I TRUST YOU and respect your research, I am not quite as bothered when you do not provide an attribution or a source. I hate Tumblr blogs that post a pretty image and no info.
You now block Pinterest. Sigh. If you pin from this site not only is your link automatically attached but your complete attribution appears on the bar above the image and I add it to the pin. Reading your blog I have to count and guess which artist applies. But lithos, linos, oils, pastels that is very difficult to discern from the blog - so I do my own research if I can.
Pinterest has major flaws. But it provides a link. And you can add info - correct info -correct other pinners- and be corrected. I assumed - incorrectly- that you would want people to see an image and follow your link and find your blog rather than a meaningless link aka Tumblr.
People who don't, don't care and I would LOVE to teach them to care - the only thing I can do is provide as much info as I can. Please reconsider pinterest for those of us who are tired of keeping files on the computer. I can create a mini-gallery on Pinterest with images from a variety of sources that I find pleasing together and constantly make new associations between art works. And I am reminded to provide all the info I can every time.
It is a conundrum. I hope you find a satisfying solution. Ultimately your satisfaction comes from inside - ain't it a bummer?
Love your blog and how much you care. Thanks, Nym
hi nym--
> I agree about all of it all sides. Your blog is you and it is yours. Most
> images are in the public domain. IF NOT please say so.
well, lots of places claim copyright to 100 year old images, but if i use anything from an individual blog, or within copyright, and i know it, i credit it.
> The internet is just another medium that presents images but all images are
>> a distortion. Images whether 20 feet high in the classroom or 4 inch square
> > here or something else in the public domain - none of them ARE the work of
> > art. We have no idea what they may look like if we could see them in person
>
> - but WE CAN'T - so we gobble up all the images we can find.
well -- the only comment i can make to that is that there are a lot of places from zazzle to many ebay sellers that are making money (one assumes) from images that we don't know where they found them.
> I'm not an old hippie but an old art history major -provenance, artist,
> date and medium are essential to appreciating a work of art. Since your
> site is mostly woodcuts and prints and I TRUST YOU and respect your
> research, I am not quite as bothered when you do not provide an attribution
> or a source. I hate Tumblr blogs that post a pretty image and no info.
>
> You now block Pinterest. Sigh. If you pin from this site not only is your
> link automatically attached but your complete attribution appears on the
> bar above the image and I add it to the pin. Reading your blog I have to
> count and guess which artist applies. But lithos, linos, oils, pastels that
> is very difficult to discern from the blog - so I do my own research if I
> can.
if everyone was you, i wouldn't have made the block, which i made right around when i made the post. and i'm not certain i'll keep it, in part for the reason you mention. but as this post points out this was not at all what i found. only a very tiny percentage of the images that i know for certain originated on this blog credited it -- there are apparently a good number of ways to avoid what you suggest is automatic: "If you pin from this site not only is your
> link automatically attached but your complete attribution appears on the
> bar above the image."
> Pinterest has major flaws. But it provides a link. And you can add info -
> correct info -correct other pinners- and be corrected. I assumed -
> incorrectly- that you would want people to see an image and follow your
> link and find your blog rather than a meaningless link aka Tumblr.
>
> People who don't, don't care and I would LOVE to teach them to care - the
> only thing I can do is provide as much info as I can. Please reconsider
> pinterest for those of us who are tired of keeping files on the computer. I
> can create a mini-gallery on Pinterest with images from a variety of
> sources that I find pleasing together and constantly make new associations
> between art works. And I am reminded to provide all the info I can every
> time.
>
> It is a conundrum. I hope you find a satisfying solution. Ultimately your
> satisfaction comes from inside - ain't it a bummer?
ultimately.... it actually ain't ;^)
sorry about how bad that looks
I've Tumblr'd a dozen of images from Japonisme-- one of my most "liked" posts is "Artist: Mila Von Luttich via japonisme" [senses-working-overtime] I credit back consistently-- hoping to increase the total joy in the world, and also pay respect to your hard work.
some Tumblrs strip all credits from pictures, going so far as to save the picture on their hard drive and repost as new. they don't like the "look" of the words which Tumblr appends.
People who are shallow and shortsighted will always have the ability to hurt people who care deeply.
that is tremendously kind of you to say fifi. the interesting this is that this discussion that's been going on here had me thinking about some really important stuff. no doubt i'll do a post on it once i have one.
<< Home