This is pretty obsessive...
side by side comparison of Lichtenstein's source material


11 Responses:

  1. mattbot says:

    While Lichtenstein's main contribution was the context in which he presented these images, it's interesting to see here that he would have been an ok inker, a poor pencilist, and an absolute crap letterer. I wonder if he could have gotten a job in the comic industry?

    • jwz says:

      Yeah, I was surprised at how much better most of the originals were!

      • jerronimo says:

        I had always thought that his greatest contribution is not necessarily the artwork that he created, but that he helped people realize that all of these comics for kids are actually art in and of themselves, rather than only stuff for kids.

        • jwz says:

          I don't think so. Lichtenstein did as much for getting people to perceive comics as art as Warhol did for getting people to perceive soup can packaging as art.

          • mattbot says:

            Definately. Duchamp's readymades didn't ready do much for the porcelain industry either. Works like these are metacommentary on the art world and its own definitions and identity. I'm sure Lichtenstein chose comics because he knew they were considered crap. (Or Low Art if you're feeling generous.) The content could have been anything perceived as trite or low-brow; its the presentation that's important. And they call it... Post-Modernism. Rar!

  2. ammonoid says:

    Count me in with the people who thought the originals were better. I thought that guy had made up those pictures, not copied them from comics. I thought it was supposed to be comic book 'style', not ripped directly from the pages of a comic.

    I guess it is supposed to deliberately provoke the question, "What is art", but my view is that copying someone else's image and presenting it as an original is plaigerism, not art.

    The same sort of intellectual wankery as Warhol et al, as previously mentioned.

    • relaxing says:

      Sorta funny to see people talking like a motion picture industry exec on here...

      Dismiss it as wankery if you want, but the "art" and meaning in the images is not as facile as you suggest.

      • ammonoid says:

        Movie exec? Bah - wankery is still wankery despite the price tag or pretentions of intellectualism.

        Pretentious art school wannabe!