> But this type of Lichtenstein work never sat well with me. The transformation is extremely minimal - minor changes to the scene, a new cropping, and conversio

> But this type of Lichtenstein work never sat well with me. The transformation is extremely minimal - minor changes to the scene, a new cropping, and conversion from ink to painting. Meh. How many times has Madonna and Child been "plagiarized?" Here[1] is some kind of orgy of "plagiarism." If Lichtenstein had andy-worhalled the original work, enlarged and made prints directly from the original pieces, there could be a point. But even if Lichtenstein had painted these cells faithfully, a painting of another work is not the original work itself. But that's not what Lichtenstein did. He merely used the comic cell originals as subjects and drastically changed the appearance so that they are quite different from the original. If Michelangelo painted a faithful copy of Da Vinci's Mona Lisa such that the two could only be distinguished using paint analysis or something, the feat should and would be applauded rather than Michelangelo being accused of plagiarism. [1] https://www.pghcitypaper.com/arts-entertainment/a-unique-art-exhibit-includes-250-portraits-of-a-single-subject-whos-also-the-docent-1941511 https://www.pghcitypaper.com/arts-entertainment/a-unique-art...