To go into further detail of what Cerveja was describing in the exposition of the comic: Todd Goldman swiped a comic from Dave Kelly and was displaying the piece in an art exhibit.
What do I mean by swipe? Well, I mean this:
(Dave Kelly’s comic on the left and Todd Goldman’s painting on the right)
Oh, and you can click here to see more examples of plagiarism.
I know that ideas cannot be protected by copyright- so a painting representing someone praying for the deaths of others is allowed- but is an animal with pointy ears, eyes closed, and a curly tail knealing beside a bed (on the left) seriously the only way to represent this idea? I think I could come up with at least 1 other way to reach the same idea-and to think THAT’S ALL TODD NEEDED! 1 other way to say the same idea! If you want to be simple: Little girl in a church praying for the death of boys (as following Todd’s other themes). If you want to be sacrilegious: Jesus on a cross uncharacteristically asking for his enemies to be smote. This isn’t hard. This begs the question: Why is an uncreative man such a successful artist?
My answer: He’s a money-making opportunist disguised as an artist.
But I am admittedly a hater.
I’ve known Dave Kelly for a long time. Due to my habit of secluding myself, I haven’t kept in touch with him (as well as other colleagues) as much as I would have liked… but I am proud to see that he took a stand against Todd. As a result, Todd has issued a half-assed apology:
“My intention was not to copy Mr. Kelly. I have never seen his work before and would never intentionally knock-off someone else’s idea.”
Who was Todd intending to copy then? Because it is a copy. And if the original wasn’t someone else’s- whose was it?
Here’s the newspaper article regarding this whole debacle.
You should show your support of Dave Kelly and buy the newly minted t-shirts featuring Todd’s “inspiration.”
-tony