Homage > Hijack is both and exhibition design and curatorial project inspired by appropriation and what it means to appropriate in the art world. The title of the exhibition perfectly encapsulates the concept of whether a piece that is 'appropriated' is completed as a homage to the original artist, or hijacked.
Exhibition Proposal and Rationale:
The definition of appropriation is perceived by everyone rather uniquely. Whilst the literal dictionary definition of appropriation is 'the use of pre-existing objects or images with little or no transformation applied to them,' this meaning has completely evolved within the creative world as artists over the centuries have appreciated, attributed, adjusted and appropriated works of art prior to their era.
Seen as often a controversial topic one must consider the question what is actually original? The fundamental stilts of the art world and the ideas that circulate within it essentially comes from inspiration and influence. The adaptation of art has grown into the 21st century where it is becoming a constant question as to who did it first? The borrowing of ideas, identities and images is the core of appropriation, some of which is celebrated and some of which is frowned upon. In the eye of the critic the term appropriation is a di- viding topic. Ultimately the conclusion largely agreed on is that the deliberate copying of a work and using it as your own is unaccept- able. However, taking influence and giving appropriate attribution when necessary is acceptable in terms of intellectual property.
This moral dilemma is something that 'Homage ≥ Hijack' seeks to discover through a broad conceptual exhibition. The intention of the exhibit is to provide a basis in which the viewer can form their own views in regard to the theory of appropriation. In an image saturated world, the viewer takes a journey through the history of appropriation and is encouraged to define what is considered a homage versus a hijack. The viewer is prompted by text on the walls and the works within the space to grasp an understanding. Pab- lo Picasso claims, 'art is theft' and his practise reflects the evolution of art as a medium for influence. Prompting the question, what if the copy is the artwork? The exhibit intends to solely be a physical representation of the philosophical, ethical and moral conversa- tions surrounding such a broadly influential topic.
Seen as often a controversial topic one must consider the question what is actually original? The fundamental stilts of the art world and the ideas that circulate within it essentially comes from inspiration and influence. The adaptation of art has grown into the 21st century where it is becoming a constant question as to who did it first? The borrowing of ideas, identities and images is the core of appropriation, some of which is celebrated and some of which is frowned upon. In the eye of the critic the term appropriation is a di- viding topic. Ultimately the conclusion largely agreed on is that the deliberate copying of a work and using it as your own is unaccept- able. However, taking influence and giving appropriate attribution when necessary is acceptable in terms of intellectual property.
This moral dilemma is something that 'Homage ≥ Hijack' seeks to discover through a broad conceptual exhibition. The intention of the exhibit is to provide a basis in which the viewer can form their own views in regard to the theory of appropriation. In an image saturated world, the viewer takes a journey through the history of appropriation and is encouraged to define what is considered a homage versus a hijack. The viewer is prompted by text on the walls and the works within the space to grasp an understanding. Pab- lo Picasso claims, 'art is theft' and his practise reflects the evolution of art as a medium for influence. Prompting the question, what if the copy is the artwork? The exhibit intends to solely be a physical representation of the philosophical, ethical and moral conversa- tions surrounding such a broadly influential topic.
'Homage > Hijack' features a majority of mediums such as photography, screen printing, collage, ready-mades, textiles and paintings to capture appropriation in all areas through a number of eras. Marcel Duchamp's work is placed central in the exhibit as a symbol of the first real exploration of ready-mades and a tribute to the conversation he started in the early 20th century. There is also a large influence of the pop art era and the want to reproduce what already exists with the American masters such as Roy Lichtenstein, Andy Warhol and Robert Rauschenberg. However, in saying that there is not any accurate chronology to the placement of works rather the viewer almost has to decipher where the appropriation came from initially. The 3 Elvis works by Andy Warhol, Diane Jones and Polixe- ni Papapetrou placed in the exhibit demonstrate this borrowing and transforming of concepts to make a bold new statement and move with the times. As the exhibit is within the National Gallery of Australia it is important to recognise Australian artists whom are inter- preting culture and evolving art representation. The works of Gordon Bennett, Margaret Preston, Daniel Boyd and Diane Jones are all Indigenous Australians whom take prospects of Indigenous art and evolve it into political statements and very individually distinctive representations. Every work selected is distinctive in its own way as it provides only a small but very important glimpse into an artist and their practise. The idea of authenticity still exists until the viewer is able to look at the piece of work and them imagine how the work that inspired it might appear. The choice to place Max Dupain's 'Sunbaker' (1938) in front of Anne Zahalka's 'Sunbaker #2" (1989) encompasses the growth of Australian appropriation quite seamlessly.
To capture such a broad era of art and the movements within a singular room and solely the collection of the NGA not everything is able to be represented. The choice to generally represent contemporary art broadens the audience that will be able to comprehend the exhibit. The title of the exhibit 'Homage ≥ Hijack' provokes the initial question of anyone that enters the space. To pay homage to someone before you versus to hijack an idea without truly paying respect is essentially the question to be answered. The symbol '>' stands mathematically for 'greater than or equal to.' This simple choice in itself subtly provides a potential answer.
The exhibition will be considered a success if it provokes a new conversation in the 21st century about this broad artistic concept many people in the art world know of but haven't often been exposed to it in such a way that they get a snapshot into all corners and interpretations of appropriation in the contemporary art world.
To capture such a broad era of art and the movements within a singular room and solely the collection of the NGA not everything is able to be represented. The choice to generally represent contemporary art broadens the audience that will be able to comprehend the exhibit. The title of the exhibit 'Homage ≥ Hijack' provokes the initial question of anyone that enters the space. To pay homage to someone before you versus to hijack an idea without truly paying respect is essentially the question to be answered. The symbol '>' stands mathematically for 'greater than or equal to.' This simple choice in itself subtly provides a potential answer.
The exhibition will be considered a success if it provokes a new conversation in the 21st century about this broad artistic concept many people in the art world know of but haven't often been exposed to it in such a way that they get a snapshot into all corners and interpretations of appropriation in the contemporary art world.
