T
Joined: Aug 18, 2002
Posts: 861
|
T
Al, I don't think there's anything wrong with copying the sacred images of Hawaii. At least you're giving credit to the origin. From my research, the actual wooden image (tiki) was seen as a representation of a god, not the actual god. Like Buddhism, the Kapu system saw almost everything as sacred, and full of the spirit, but not the seen as the actual spirit. The tiki was like a house for the spirit, but so were bananas and coconuts. Seriously, I'm not being funny.
As for appropriation of images, everyone should at least recognize where they're work is coming from. When I started carving, I was a bit blind to it, but now I realize, and acknowledge my influences. I won't deny I'm inspired by, and even use the same techniques, or features as other carvers have done. I find that who's ever else's work I'm really into at that particular moment, my carving will start to take on a bit of their character. I never work from photographs, but sometimes work from my drawings which get influenced quite subconsciously. Also, I don't think Al thought at all that Drew blatenly copied his work. I do realize how frusterating it must be to build up a style, then only to have it "honored" then it ends up in the Bishop Museum of all places. As for Drew, I'm sure he never intended any of this, and Al means it in the best of light.
|
