Recently, I published several posts related to the topic of inspiration vs. imitation, and I discussed two poems by Dickinson which seem to have been inspired by an essay written by her mentor Thomas Wentworth Higginson. One of the posts (HERE) includes this:
Dickinson was very well read and intelligent, and at her core, a creative being, inspired by all facets of her life. It would seem near impossible for her not to have reacted or responded to what inspired her. However, inspiration is not the same as imitation. While it may well be an intrinsic challenge to create or transform influences into something unique, Dickinson was always authentic to her own voice and style.
The post also includes this passage from Mary Elizabeth Barbot’s article “Emily Dickinson Parallels”:
“That she ever consciously plagiarized with serious intent is irreconcilable with her fine sense of integrity, evidenced by a scrupulous acknowledgment in a letter to Higginson: ‘I marked a line in one verse, because I met it after I made it, and never consciously touch a paint mixed by another person.’ That she sometimes unconsciously used others' ideas or phrases which had been absorbed into the rich depth of her mind appears evident; but always these ‘echoes’ bear unmistakably the characteristic stamp of her original style.”
As as result of all of this, I explored some articles on inspiration and imitation and found this short and sweet description:
“The core difference is that inspiration is intellectual birth, imitation is intellectual reproduction, and plagiarism is intellectual theft. The crucial factor is whether you are creating something new and unique with your own distinct voice and style, or if you are passing off someone else's efforts as your own.”
This investigation of mine reminded me of the scene in “Amadeus” where Mozart arrives to meet Emperor Joseph II, and Antonio Salieri plays a short march of welcome that he had composed. Mozart then sits at the keyboard to play – and embellish – the march for the Emperor. That scene is HERE.
The original piece was Salieri’s inspiration, and Mozart’s augmentation was his…imitation? Hmm…what word better describes this? His embellished work? His recontextualization of the work? His reinterpretation?
Is this appropriation?
My wife and I traveled to Washington, DC, earlier this week to see a small exhibit at the Hirshhorn Museum, “Basquiat x Banksy” – and “appropriation” is the term used to describe Banksy’s take on Basquiat’s painting “Boy and Dog in a Johnnypump.” Below is info from the museum’s website, and then in the pics you can see the write-up about the two paintings.
Basquiat × Banksy is an exhibition of two major paintings, one by Jean-Michel Basquiat (b. Brooklyn, New York, 1960–1988) and the other by Banksy (anonymous; b. near Bristol, England). Placed in dialogue, Basquiat’s Boy and Dog in a Johnnypump (1982) and Banksy’s response, Banksquiat. Boy and Dog in Stop and Search (2018), reveal throughlines among street art, contemporary art, and the popular imagination.
Dickinson was very well read and intelligent, and at her core, a creative being, inspired by all facets of her life. It would seem near impossible for her not to have reacted or responded to what inspired her. However, inspiration is not the same as imitation. While it may well be an intrinsic challenge to create or transform influences into something unique, Dickinson was always authentic to her own voice and style.
The post also includes this passage from Mary Elizabeth Barbot’s article “Emily Dickinson Parallels”:
“That she ever consciously plagiarized with serious intent is irreconcilable with her fine sense of integrity, evidenced by a scrupulous acknowledgment in a letter to Higginson: ‘I marked a line in one verse, because I met it after I made it, and never consciously touch a paint mixed by another person.’ That she sometimes unconsciously used others' ideas or phrases which had been absorbed into the rich depth of her mind appears evident; but always these ‘echoes’ bear unmistakably the characteristic stamp of her original style.”
As as result of all of this, I explored some articles on inspiration and imitation and found this short and sweet description:
“The core difference is that inspiration is intellectual birth, imitation is intellectual reproduction, and plagiarism is intellectual theft. The crucial factor is whether you are creating something new and unique with your own distinct voice and style, or if you are passing off someone else's efforts as your own.”
This investigation of mine reminded me of the scene in “Amadeus” where Mozart arrives to meet Emperor Joseph II, and Antonio Salieri plays a short march of welcome that he had composed. Mozart then sits at the keyboard to play – and embellish – the march for the Emperor. That scene is HERE.
The original piece was Salieri’s inspiration, and Mozart’s augmentation was his…imitation? Hmm…what word better describes this? His embellished work? His recontextualization of the work? His reinterpretation?
Is this appropriation?
My wife and I traveled to Washington, DC, earlier this week to see a small exhibit at the Hirshhorn Museum, “Basquiat x Banksy” – and “appropriation” is the term used to describe Banksy’s take on Basquiat’s painting “Boy and Dog in a Johnnypump.” Below is info from the museum’s website, and then in the pics you can see the write-up about the two paintings.
Basquiat × Banksy is an exhibition of two major paintings, one by Jean-Michel Basquiat (b. Brooklyn, New York, 1960–1988) and the other by Banksy (anonymous; b. near Bristol, England). Placed in dialogue, Basquiat’s Boy and Dog in a Johnnypump (1982) and Banksy’s response, Banksquiat. Boy and Dog in Stop and Search (2018), reveal throughlines among street art, contemporary art, and the popular imagination.
 |  |
 |  |
 |  |
What are your thoughts on this? “Appropriation” always seems to have negative connotations attached to it, so I wonder if there is another, better term that I’m missing. Many works when reimagined by another artist involves parody (for example, parodies of Hooper’s “Nighthawks” or Wood’s “American Gothic”) – but is there a term for a reimagination that is not necessarily a parody?
 |  |
RSS Feed
