nick92675 wrote:devils advocate.

ok, so you're out of college and grew up on hardcore and other great music. you went to art school and skated and listened to minor threat constantly. your band struggles to make it and you of course have to get a day job now that you're no longer on the dole. fuck - those student loans are piling up, but you and your friends started a graphic design shop. it's you and your mate john, who also skated with you since 7th grade and went to all those awesome shows when you were straight edge, then also got off the edge wagon and started getting shitfaced every night listening to the jesus lizard. your company starts by making skate decks and screening posters for bands. eventually you get into web and print, and one day nike approaches you cuz your company kicks ass.

shit, this is post modernism at it's finest right? i mean, you've been approriating and recontextualizing for years now (we learned those big words in art school) - why not? i fucking love minor threat, most of the jags seeing the ad won't know, but those who REALLY GET IT, will see it and say, that's fucking cool man - MINOR THREAT! listen, one way or the other, i have to make this ad for the client in order for me to afford the rent in my cool loft space. it can be something retarded and stupid, or something that is actually cool, and maybe will get some 10yr old skater kid into cool music. and shit, maybe pitchfork or a bunch of internet nerds will get all uppity about it and there will be a big buzz, and maybe dischord can sell a few more records, and i can in some sort of fucked up way - help out the scene. if i have to be part of the system, maybe i can sorta use it for something good right?

it's totally cool and a nod to the history when a band rips off a previous record cover right - so what's the big deal here?

/devils advocate

tmidgett wrote:this one is easy

bands ape other album covers--both parties involved are bands. the apers are bound to be descendants in some way of the aped. it's pretty much always some kind of tribute to the aped. artists using other artists' art in a knowing, respectful way.

ad agencies ape iconic artistic imagery--the aped are artists, the apers are ad agencies are doing the bidding of large corporations. the aped and apers are not contemporaries or fellow travelers or kindred spirits. they have nothing in common as often as not, and their working methods and philosophies are often staunchly opposed to each other. the apers use this imagery, however, to create an implied association between the artists and the large corporation. if the artists have not consented to this association, this is fucked.

dischord has made a strict point of not associating with anything they don't absolutely want to be associated with. so the argument that this will somehow jazz up their image with the kids or whatever is irrelevant. they aren't asking to jazz up their image with the kids, and they shouldn't have this kind of thing foisted upon them.

nike sucks. i've always hated their stupid shoes, and, also, they suck.

jordanosaur wrote:Unless I'm missing something, I don't think the bigger picture has been addressed here. The devil's advocate theory has some clout in my mind, but it doesn't not change the fact that Nike's ad goons knowingly ripped a piece of artwork owned by Dischord without asking for any kind of permission.

That's fucked up.

n.c. wrote:I think it's as simple as this: these impotent pricks don't have a culture of their own