Replicas and copies of artifacts with significant importance have
existed through out art history, however it is only now in the 21st
Century that we question the moral rights of doing so. It seems almost
impossible to pinpoint who initiated an idea first, however it is quite apparent when there has been architectural influence. There are many examples of
‘architectural copies’ but were they designed as a sign of respect to the
original, as a homage or simply as an act of plagiarism which up until recently
has often gone unnoticed.
Of course people recognizes the similarities between these ‘rip off
designs’ as quite often they are a blatant copy. However perhaps they are accepted
as architectural influence, all designers have to take inspiration from another
regardless of the product. It is impossible to design without being
subconsciously influenced by objects we have seen before. But what would the
original artist say? After all they are most often deceased and unable to
object to their designs being replicated. An artist’s skills and knowledge
whether that be as an architect or a painter, is their niche. Their unique
selling point is their ability to design and produce work that the vast
majority of people are unable to.
‘ Intangible content is usually difficult
to create but cheap to copy’[1]
Replica designs can devalue the time, effort and skill that are required
to produce the original. There are three reasons to replicate; pupils in
practice, masters diffusing their work, and third parties in pursuit of gain.[1]
One cannot design without having
any prior knowledge of their subject. Students are actively encouraged to gain
inspiration from previous works. This is a fictional form of replication,
students replicating previous work in order to gain a greater understanding and
knowledge. The second point made my Walter Benjamin indicates artists reusing
their own designs. This a technique perhaps used to create a sense of style
that is recognizable by the public, clearly evident by the 19th
Century architect Alfred Waterhouse. Similarly modern practices often
replicate their own designs as it considerably reduces time and cost. Finally
parties in pursuit of gain,2 in my opinion this has a negative connotation, suggesting
con- artists producing replica clothing merchandise, books and prints, it
perhaps does not relate to architecture as significantly, however this third
replica type may ultimately lead to a decline in the respect and importance of architects
and artists alike. Or perhaps the alternative view is that replica designs help
to promote and celebrate the original piece of work. It may be that people are
unaware of the original until they are faced with the replica.
There is a similarity between all replicas the original aura2
(emotions, senses and enjoyment experienced when viewing the original) is lost
when replaced with a replica. The introduction of photography and film in 19th
Century could be regarded as the first case of replication of artistic
works. I appreciate that
photography is not a form of plagiarism however it does indicate how the aura
of the scene is lost when experiencing the situation through an image.
‘ Even the most perfect reproduction of a
work of art is lacking in one element: it’s presence in time and space’[2]
Replica buildings find is very difficult to replicate the anticipated aura
the original architect wanted to achieve. This is close to impossible due to
factors such as; the site, the context the architectural periods and the people’s
current knowledge, respect and appreciation. Successful replicas do not attempt
to replicate the original’s sense of being, however they must create their own.
It’s a difficult subject to analyse, however through researching the
original architects, in particular Andrea Palladio and his influence in the UK,
along with a history of the first replicas designs, I hope to come to some
conclusion of whether replica designs are a disrespectful copycat or perhaps
they do hold some importance to today’s architectural society.
[1]
Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations: The Work
of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproductions. Pimlico. 1999
[2]
Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations: The Work
of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproductions. Pimlico. 1999. P.214
No comments:
Post a Comment