Roy Lichtenstein is considered one of the most influential artists of the 20th century, famous for his iconic pop art pieces that showcased his fascination with commercial art and culture. However, a new controversy has surfaced, as allegations of plagiarism have been brought against the late artist. The accusations claim that Lichtenstein may have taken a significant amount of his inspiration from other artists, rather than creating original works himself. In this article, we will explore the allegations and what they mean for Lichtenstein’s legacy.
Roy Lichtenstein is widely considered one of the founders of American pop art, known for his signature style that featured bright colors, Benday dots, and comic strip imagery. However, a new documentary, WHAAM! BLAM! Roy Lichtenstein and the Art of Appropriation, alleges that hundreds of Lichtenstein’s pieces of work can be traced to other artists–comic book artists who had lived austere and even destitute lives, while Lichtenstein’s paintings sold for tens of millions of dollars.
The documentary shows more than 30 comic artists “appropriated” by Lichtenstein who believe they were cheated of recognition. Among them is Hy Eisman, a comic strip artist who has just turned 96 and only recently discovered that Lichtenstein had reproduced one of his images in the 1960s. “I worked like a dog on this stupid page and this guy has $20m to show for it. If it wasn’t so tragic, it would be [funny],” he said. Eisman’s Private Secretary comic of 1963 was cribbed for Lichtenstein’s Girl in Window of the same year, and he was paid only $4 for the page, while Lichtenstein was able to turn it into a painting and make millions.
Comic book expert David Barsalou, who has traced about 300 Lichtenstein works to other artists, argues that “his images were like just direct copies.” They include Lichtenstein’s Blam of 1962, in which a pilot ejects from an exploding plane, just like Russ Heath’s All-American Men of War #89 of the same year. Heath was appreciated for the high quality of his work, but he struggled financially. He died in 2018, having ended his days relying on charity for his food.
While some critics have labeled Lichtenstein’s works as “copying,” Bradford R Collins, author of the book Pop Art and professor of art history at the University of South Carolina, defended Lichtenstein, stating that it was not plagiarism but appropriation. “If Lichtenstein made comic books out of it, that would be stealing. But appropriation means you’re taking something and reusing it for a very different purpose, taking something out of a comic book and making it into a painting”, he said.
Before his death, Heath had expressed frustration over Lichtenstein’s appropriation of his work: “I couldn’t do anything because all the characters that I did draw for comic books were, at that time, owned by the comic book company. So, if they want to sue, they could sue and have a legitimate reason to sue. But they wouldn’t make enough to bother having a suit.”
The documentary also features Michael Daley, a cartoonist, who argues that “technically and artistically, comic book artists are generally far better draughtsmen than Lichtenstein, who couldn’t even correctly copy the properly drawn ellipse of a jet engine’s air intake”. Daley also points out that comic book artists’ compositions were more artfully dynamic and expressive, and each one being a master of the graphic potency of a cropped image.
Despite the allegations against him, Roy Lichtenstein remains widely regarded as one of the foremost artists of the 20th century, along with Andy Warhol, who also created the pop art movement by appropriating imagery from modern American culture. Lichtenstein died in 1997, but his work now changes hands for millions of dollars, with the most expensive, a painting called Masterpiece, reportedly selling for $165m.
In conclusion, the recent allegations of plagiarism against Roy Lichtenstein have once again stirred up debate about the line between inspiration and theft in the world of art. While some argue that borrowing from previous works and styles is inevitable, others believe that blatant copying is unethical and undermines the artistic process. Whatever your opinion may be, it is important to acknowledge and respect the original works that may have been appropriated without credit. As we continue to examine the history and future of art, let us strive for transparency and accountability in all creative endeavors.
