Serkan \u00d6zkaya can remember copying important works of contemporary art from an early age. Reproductions were for \u00d6zkaya and other artists of his generation more important than the original could ever be. The prospect of seeing an original became a form of back-up and often a let-down \u2013 potentially it was smaller, less colourful, and in worse repair than ever imagined (\u2026).<\/p>\n
Triggering this moment of ecstasy followed by clarity for himself and others is where Michelangelo\u2019s statue of David<\/em> comes in. \u00d6zkaya has never seen the original statue. \u201cSuch iconic works no longer exist in reality as originals,\u201d says \u00d6zkaya, \u201cthey have become verbal legends, all about the replicas, the copies, the reconstructions, and the fakes.\u201d (\u2026) Can repetition in any way spoil the beauty of such an iconic work of art? Does it merely suggest that the original has lost the very essence that set it apart? With the increasing ease of precise mechanical reproduction, it is in fact the copies that authenticate the status of icons.<\/p>\n One last question: Does \u00d6zkaya have no qualms about copying, personally adapting and re-contextualising such an icon? He is quick to answer, \u201cI feel closer to Michelangelo in person, than to the values of the museum\u201d. And with this salvo, another iconic David<\/em> enters the world.<\/p>\n (November Paynter)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","categories":[],"class_list":["post-4566","kb_artist","type-kb_artist","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":{"article_image":4564,"article_image_bu_de":"","article_image_bu_en":"","datum_suche":"2013-07-10 10:16:32"},"yoast_head":"\n