Posted on 02/24/2005 10:19:19 PM PST by Fizzie
wow
Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990
Public Law 101-644
yeah,...there were 2 days left for the auction,...reserve price hadn't been broken yet,...but I'm sure some collectors would've seen the value as historical/contrversial item
I know an art lawyer in Santa Fe ...just sent this article to her.
hey,...back at # 57,...thanks to Howlin'
Actually, it was documented that the british gave blankets that were used by smallpox victims to a group of indians as a group, hoping they would get the disease and thus be wiped out...
However, what churchill was refering to was an entirely different smallpox epidemic that hit the Mandans sometime in the 1800s...
No, Churchill used an older account as the basis for his anti-american hit piece, plain and simple.
THIS is the problem with people like Churchill - actual real live events are thought false, because they make up lies...
And just as an aside, the letters written by Amherst, and others, during that period are available in the library of congress - interesting readin, if one has the time. It lays it all out in detail...
Maybe Churchill should have actually spent more time actually researching, and less time pontificating... :)
I sent the seller an email last night, telling them they better read that article at the top of this thread.
see #562...I assume he called himself an Indian artist....not good
yeah,...I recall you post the reply,correct? Last night was intense and comical,when I went to bed I kept having muffled laughter and chuckles,my wife said I woke her up!
Me, too. I couldn't wait to show it to my husband this morning!
yeah,...ol' Ward never learned that very important one,about when you realize you're......STOP DIGGIN'
_
======================= Transcript for Part IV:
Churchill on getting revenge for speeding tickets: And Im not really comfortable with, since Im presenting no public hazard ever when Im ticketed, can attest to that, we can take that further at some point tonight if youd like to, if youd like to challenge it, but Im presenting no public hazard, Im simply being asked to ante up to pay for my own repression.
Not being comfortable with that, I have a rule of thumb: I smile very politely to the cop, take the ticket, look to see how much the fine is going to be, and before I leave that state, I make sure I cause at least that much property damage in state material before I go, so its a wash, boys and girls (laughter and applause).
He plagiarized his girlfriend's work.
Want to hear a funny one? Willard Stone was a full blood Cherokee, and one of the most famous Indian artist's. His son is an artist too, but cannot sell his art as "Indian Art" because his dad did not have a roll number. Is this a great country or what?
Willard Stone lived and died in Locust Grove, OK. I knew him.
what a vile SOB,...Mr. Cautionary Tale
Certainly it would generally seem ethical, but I've seen plenty of works that were obviously derived from da Vinci or other artists with no overt credit given. Further, in things like movie scores, it's quite common to hear snippets of public domain tunes with no credit given to them (sometimes public domain works are credited, but not always).
To be sure, one must invest a certain level of creativity in a work derived from a public domain work before one can copyright it. I would guess some of Churchill's serigraphs probably meet this criterion as general works of arts, though art prints have some special rules if they are to qualify for certain special copyright protections.
BTW, another thing I was curious about: suppose I buy at an estate sale a camera positive (reversal film) movie made after 1948. What would the copyright status of the film be? I would think that, in the absense of any documentation to the contrary, buying the original film would give me the copyright to it. But what are the actual rules?
"Paintings and drawings by Ward Churchill are at the Arlene Hirschfelder Collection at (ta-da) the University of Arkansas at Little Rock!"
Ta-da!
Hirschfelder is an authority on Indian arts and crafts, and she authors nonfiction books about Indians for children. She just can't spot a fake Indian and his plagiarized art - she collects it and probably cites it!
It seems there are a hell of non-Indians who are (academic) authorities on Indian tribal cultures and art, and exploit Indian *issues.* Evidently, she's a colleague of Churchill's. In a bibliography of (recommended) Amer.Indian writers, she cites Churchill's essays, his TRIBAL indentity.(!)
from http://www.shaki.org/about/4hirschfelder
Arlene Hirschfelder
Author, Children of Native America Today
Arlene Hirschfelder is the author of award-winning nonfiction books, as well as activity guides and bibliographies concerning Native Americans. She has devoted the last thirty-five years to teaching and writing about Native American histories, cultures, and contemporary issues. Children of Native America Today is Ms. Hirschfelders seventh childrens book.
Trajan88
Of course, the fact that Big Chief Phoneybaloney concealed the origins of his plagiarism proves what we already knew anyway: he's nothing but a fraud and a liar.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.