civilized ku # 395 ~ copy this
Monday, February 22, 2010 at 10:22AM 
Stop sign ~ Route 9N - Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggenOver the past week or so there has been more than a (IMO, a tempest in a teapot) bit of discussion on a number of sites - HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE - regarding a "Copycat Or Not?" issue that involves the work of David Burdeny and its Look-a-like relationship to the work of Sze Tsung Leong and Elger Esser.
The gist of the thing is that Burdeny has plagiarized the work of a couple "established" Artists-Who-Use-A-Camera, especially that of Sze Tsung Leong. This is based on the fact that Burdeny has mounted an exhibit that, picture for picture, duplicates the landscape-ish type views - from an amazing number of exactly the same locations (the same tripod footprint) from around the world - previously made by Sze Tsung Leong. Add to that the fact that Burdeny's exhibit uses the same framing and exhibit display style as a recent Sze Tsung Leong exhibit, and the stage is set for an Art World pissing contest.
It seems pretty clear to me that Burdeny has exhibited a rather strange MO of following in Sze Tsung Leong's footsteps / tripod footprints as far as picturing locations goes and nowhere does he make it clear as to what's up with that. However, it also seems that he has pictured those locations with a distinctly different vision - different seasons, different color palettes, different (albeit subtly so) camera POVs, and so on. So, IMO, I think that the notion of "copycat" / plagiarism is more than a bit farfetched.
And, BTB, interestingly enough, many of those who have weighed in on the dustup prefer Burdeny's vision over that of Sze Tsung Leong.
While Sze Tsung Leong's gallery-ist, Yossi Milo, is a bit apoplectic regarding Burdeny's pictures and especially so regarding the truly copycat manner in which they were exhibited, Elger Esser's gallery representative is not so upset. He looks at it his way:
"He (Burdeny) kind of copies quite few different photographers,” says Jason Ysenburg, the gallery's co-director. “He has studied his artists, and seen what would work well.” But a crucial difference between Esser’s work and Burdeny’s, according to Ysenburg, is that Esser’s landscapes reference 19th century painting. Burdeny’s images, by contrast, are true to the scenes and colors as he finds them. “He’s changing nothing,” Ysenburg says. “He’s just recording the image.”
All of that said, here's my take on the whole thing - if I were able to play Art Collector at the $$$$$-level that Sze Tsung Leong's print sell for - $19,000-$25,000US (and up) - I'd be buying a couple of "matching sets". That is, a couple of Sze Tsung Leong pictures together with their "copycat" Burdeny counterparts.
Seriously.
It seems to me that considered together, the pictures make an interesting statement - and, IMO, a statement worthy of a lot of thought and consideration - about the medium of photography and its inherent / intrinsic relationship to the real. That, and how (or if) one picture maker's vision of a given referent can be distinctly different - in a manner worthy of considerable consideration - (or not) from that of another picture maker's take on the same scene, subject, theme, etc.
If I were Yossi Milo, instead of advising Sze Tsung Leong to contact his lawyer, I'd be negotiating with both picture makers with the objective of mounting a joint exhibit of their respective work. I'd do that because - you read it here first - I'll bet my bottom dollar that some enterprising and "creative" museum curator of photography will be mounting such a show - albeit with many other "copycat" sets from a wide array of picture makers - in the not to distant future.
Reader Comments (3)
What upsets me is that money is being taken away from hardworking Chinese artists by inferior, cheaply made work from North America ;)
"What upsets me is that money is being taken away from hardworking Chinese artists by inferior, cheaply made work from North America ;)
February 22, 2010 | Arthur"
LOL really hard!!
My thoughts exactly when I read about all the fuzz... Burdeny has with his body of work made a lot of interresting statements about the medium of photography that I fully agree with. 1) There isn't much originality left in the world of Photography - Most has been done 2) Most photographers are copycats, they just work harder at hiding the fact 3) Photography is in it's nature a copy of a copy that can be made lots of new copies from 4) Photography isn't really art, it's just a word used by some photographers to boost their own egos an tell the world that their work is superiour to that of others ;).