Forged Obama Art?

By
October 8, 2009

Michelle Malkin has some of the details.

Brian at SnappedShot offers one comparison.

Another in the animated overlay GIF below.

Fake-WH-Art



AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
Comments:
  1. Kaitian says:

    You are a racist!

  2. Zimriel says:

    Mmm, throbbing artwork. It makes me HAWT

  3. Evil Pundit says:

    There are five ‘a’s in “Raaaaacist!”

  4. bubba says:

    the word is waaaacist!!!!!
    Barney Fwank

  5. Ad rem says:

    Man…..you crackers jus’ tryin’ to keep a sistah down!!!

  6. He was trying to do Mondrian but he couldn’t get the rectangles right…

  7. Ad rem says:

    Actually, this is a fabric swatch from Michelle’s newest dress!

  8. Ran says:

    Bubba… “waaaaacist!!!!!” has five a’s.
    Forged art? Like the “HOPE” portrait that was a an obvious rip-off of Andrew Warhol?
    Don’t think of it as “forged” – think of it as “socially justified redistribution” of someone else’s talent.
    Now if you want to see art in forging… Check this:
    http://ifyouseekpeace.blogspot.com/2009/10/rugers-sr-556.html

  9. Ad rem says:

    Ran,
    That’s my kind of art!

  10. Thomas says:

    This kind of interesting. On a number of sites there are comments about how both are bad, or how modern art is crap anyway. I think the fact so many people are looking and talking about it may provide one example of a counter-point and value in the work. if the original has no value, what is the big deal.
    I don’t think people on the right side of the political spectrum should conceed art to the left. Sure many, or most artists are flakes. But take some time one day and visit any of the major museum web sites where they post artist talks. I like the Tate. Most, if not all, are examples of smart people exploring interesting ideas in a different medium than the literal word or form.
    As for the work in question, I think I prefer the sunny yellow border over the blue one. When I was in art and architecture studio we commonly did color exercises using a famous painting as a starting point then change it’s color. Basically remove composition from the task at hand, and see how color alters the work. I think you have to keep in mind that many many people ( not me) know every work by Matisse and know at first glance this is a referencial work. I simple example would be playing some Led Zepplin cords, everyone gets it.
    If you don’t buy that, then that we had another saying, There are no new ideas.

  11. vanderleun says:

    Affirmative action art copped and spun from dead white males. You’d think Thomas could cut and arrange paper by herself, but nooooooo…..

  12. Amphipolis says:

    This is not a big deal. Artists have used each other for inspiration for centuries. If the artist denied it, well that would be another story.
    Do not make this into something it’s not. There are plenty of policy issues to fight over, this is not one of them.

  13. Ad rem says:

    Wow, I’m gonna paint myself some fifty dollar bills and use them to pay my taxes. Treasury will understand that I’m just an “artist”.

  14. Ella says:

    Amphipolis and Thomas,
    That painting is so far beyond “referential” or “inspiration.” It’s flat-out stealing. This isn’t a controversy about the Obamas (aside from craptacular taste in art), but there is no way in heck that that woman should hang in the National Gallery. She’s a dirty rotten thief who tried to turn a cheap buck off someone else’s work. She doesn’t deserve the honor of hanging in a gallery.

  15. Neo says:

    OK .. I’ll say it .. the best affirmative action can render

  16. Joe says:

    You sir, are a colorist.

  17. Joe says:

    Now this is art! http://www.heyokamagazine.com/HEYOKA.3.ARTVIEWS.%206%20PIECES.htm I espeically like Joseph Beuys, which pretty much sums up trying to explain art. A avant guard performance piece that acutally makes sense.
    I am all for Obama getting some African American art he likes in the White House (why not). I am all for Obama getting some modern art he likes. I mean, he has his pick of the federal museums and they have great stuff for him to pick from. But not because they are symbols, but because he likes them and they speak to him.
    I mean, seriously, does he really like Mattise, let alone the Mattise “study”? Probably not. Some staffer picked them.
    Come on Mr. President, reveal yourself. Pick something that you really dig. Here’s some really good stuff to pick from (some are not in federal collections, but I am sure Obama has pull with the Art Institute).
    http://www.english.uiowa.edu/courses/boos/galleries/afampainting.htm

  18. Korla Pundit says:

    How about a portrait of Che?

  19. Andrew says:

    In the musical world this would be called sampling, and the ‘Artist’ would be sued for copyright violations.
    In the literary world this would be called plagiarism, but that seems to be ok with this Administration. Just ask Joe Biden and Obama, they have no problems taking credit for other peoples writings. Why would you expect them to have a problem with this?

  20. JE says:

    Alma Thomas is black. Henri Matisse is not. That’s the main reason why Obama choose this piece of fake art over the original.

  21. BoR says:

    Swamp salesman sells swamp to country that already owns swamp.
    It’s so … Obama, baby.

  22. Yogimus says:

    Lets discuss the piece titled Watussi
    It appears to be a copy of another painting, with the colors mixed up.
    Closer examination will reveal that the colors are not just randomly changed. They are opposites. (contrary) with the exception of the black. Now maybe… just MAYBE… it is a statement and therefore art in its own right, discussing how opposites can equally be beautiful, and that color has no bearing on the overall structure and inherent beauty of the piece.
    Deeper reflection upon the piece will lead us to ask “Why did the artist leave the black shape black? Why not white, which is the opposite of black?”
    Perhaps the artist is implying that black is fine the way it is. Maybe the implication is that white itself is obscene, or the artist lacks the courage to “go full monte”.. but like all good art, that is what makes it work. It makes you think.
    OR, we could get petty about it.

  23. Philip McDaniel says:

    A rose it ain’t.

  24. CPT. Charles says:

    How .. symbolic.
    A fraud, for a fraud.

  25. Seejay says:

    Has the day arrived yet when we can judge blacks for their deeds and their character?
    Surely it’s not “racist” to use the Obamas as an example….After all, they’re The First Couple….!
    The say they like art, but evidently not art claimed by white people..!
    No, they only like art if its created by a white person, then STOLEN by an African…!
    Doesn’t this story lend credence to the stereotype that blacks really don’t create anything…? That they are, for the most part, parasitic..?
    Just what are we suppose to think about this? How much (mainly white) taxpayer-money went to the black “artist?”/thief?
    Should we expect a refund..?

  26. Amanda says:

    Am I the only one tired of being labeled a racist just because I think Obama is a fucking moron? I’d think he was an idiot no matter what color he was. Ye gods, people. If all you can think about is the race thing, I think that makes YOU the racist one.

  27. whiteandblackmixed says:

    “No, they only like art if its created by a white person, then STOLEN by an African…!”
    Suggest you try and check the locked cabinets in all of Europe (England in particular)and their museums so you can see original AFRICAN creation stolen by white people…Shameful history!

  28. Philip McDaniel says:

    “so you can see original AFRICAN creation stolen by white people…”
    Reference? Explanation?

  29. Christophe says:

    It’s only SAMPLING– don’tyaknow, that’s been going on in the Rap adn Pop world for years… maybe she was just ahead of her time!
    It just points out how the original is just as useless as the copy…