Self-Plagiarism?

The Bridges of Glendale, 36x48x2, 2010

I painted this.

Then I sold it, which is great. But I missed it.

I liked it as an object to hang in my house. The colors seemed to help tie together all the rooms I hung it in. I like the message, that even freeways and municipal water management systems have their beauty. I liked hanging a portrait of my neighborhood.

So I painted it again. Is that self-plagiarism? Is there such a thing as self-plagiarism or is that simply self-improvement? Is it okay?

The Freeways of Glendale, 24x36, 2011

 

Follow Amy Bernays on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bernays

Comments

[RandyMan7027]

06:50 PM on 03/06/2012

IMO it's ok to explore the same subject multiple times if you feel the need to do so. The problem lies in making identical works and passing them off to collectors as being unique, one-of-a-kind creations. That creeps a bit too close to Warholian manufacturing for me. However, even that can be ok as long as you offer full disclosure in advance of each sale.

[jdevans]

08:25 PM on 01/06/2012

Art experts aren't really sure why Leonardo da Vinci painted two versions of his "Virgin of the Rocks", but if he could do it, so can you. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/8666224/Leonardo-da-Vincis-Virgin-of-the-Rocks-paintings-united-for-first-time.html

[jdevans]

05:11 PM on 01/06/2012

Leonardo da Vinci painted two versions of "Virgin of the Rocks". If Leonardo did it, you can, too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/8666224/Leonardo-da-Vincis-Virgin-of-the-Rocks-paintings-united-for-first-time.html

[Satirist1]

01:29 PM on 01/06/2012

Self-plagiarism is a self-contradictory concept.
Every artist creates his/her own tricks and riffs. Unless consciously repudiated, they inform the creative output. See Picasso's and Stravinsky's stylistic periods.