Screenshots -- October 24, 2023

Locator: 45819B. 

Free speech is fine.

Bull market remains intact:

Schwab will do just fine:

*******************************
The Fine Arts Page

"Picasso's Transformation," Jed Perl, The New York Review, November 2, 2023, pp. 50+.

50th anniversary of Picasso's death in 1973.

The shift: from Picasso to Warhol.

"The shift -- Picasso out and Warhol in -- began a generation ago in the 1980s at no less an institution than the Museum of Modern Art, where Picasso had by many estimates been the doninant figure since the late 1930s.

In 1980, seven years after his death, MOMA said good-bye with a retrospective that filled the entire museum.

Then, in 1989, two years after Warhol's death, MOMA embraced the new dispensation with a retrospective that filled two floors and was, The New York Times reported, 'the most ambitious solo how at the Modern since the Picasso retrospective in 1980. The scale is not so much a canonization as a recognition that the canonization has alreedy taken place.'"

And, thus, for those of us in flyover country who missed it, Picasso is out, Warhol is in.

[For those keeping score and playing at home: before Picasso, the standard bearer was Cézanne.]

The article is long and I've only just begun ... but the writer deals with the "issue" of transformation. At the core of all artistic activity there is an act of transformation. In a case brought before SCOTUS this year, "Warhol vs Goldsmith" the majority decided against Warhhol and for the plaintiff. The majority in a 7-2 decision felt that Warhol's "touch-up" of Goldsmith's photograph was not transformative. 

One can read about the case here.

After a bit of reflection, I would have agreed with Kagan and the Chief Justice but I do understand the majority's concern that "a minor touch-up" of a photograph that might have taken but a moment or two was not worth the $10,000 Warhol received for his work.

Jed Perl would have sided with the plaintiff, Goldsmith.