4 ms·
> We have historical fiction where we mix past and present real and fake. It is fine as long as it presented as historical fiction. > unless they were complet
by matkoniecz 4y ago
> We have historical fiction where we mix past and present real and fake.
It is fine as long as it presented as historical fiction.
> unless they were completely deceiving their audience for manipulation or monetary gain, i.e. fraud.
They were at least deliberately deceiving their audience (though technically without stating demonstrably false statement - nevertheless they were lying)
- mc32 4y agoThat’s a possibility. However maybe her “real” audience is a small group to whom she presented these via other media and are or were looking for reaction to the art. In other words a public art installation. Is it real, is it fake? That’s the art. The bigger problem to me is other people swiping her art, not confirming and not attributing it —simply using her art.
- matkoniecz 4y agoThey proudly announced that some newspaper posted their collages (presented as real photos): https://kittiyapawlowski.com/news-publications/published-in-the-times-of-london https://kittiyapawlowski.com/news-publications/published-in-... They had no trouble with selling collages as real photos.
- mc32 4y agoInteresting. If they passed them as real to the newspaper then yeah, that's problematic. What I don't know and can't tell from that is if that claim is part of the art. In other words I cannot verify that was actually published on the Times on Nov 10. Or if it was how much the times knew.