Throughout the history of art, reinterpreting and repurposing iconic works have been respected creative practices. An artist can take a previous work and “return” it to themThat is, creating a new version that offers its own approach without hiding the original. This is what figures like Picasso did Las Meninas By Velazquez, Duchamp with Gioconda Or Lichtenstein when he introduced Picasso’s style to the world of comics. In all of these cases, the audience has recognized the original source and can appreciate how the artist transformed it into something new.
The problem arises when this process is no longer transparent. If someone restores a work, but does not acknowledge its origin, what could have been homage becomes an uncredited imitation. This is the case with La Chola Poblete with the works of Oscar Boney: By repeating Bonnie’s concept almost completely without mentioning it, the piece loses its meaning after the dialogue and becomes closer to copying than reinterpretation.
He clarified something important to avoid misreadings: I love Chola Poblete’s work. I met her when she was an emerging artist, and in fact, I bought a work from her that hangs in my living room today. I’m not talking out of disdain or distance: I appreciate it. But also I believe that art – like any serious language – requires intellectual honesty.
More than two decades ago, Oscar Boney – one of the most exciting artists at the legendary Di Tella Institute – sparked a scandal in the late 1960s with Working familyWhere a family of flesh and blood stayed for hours on a platform like live action.
Years later, Boni, also a great photographer, made a series of moving portraits: himself, wearing a black suit, jumping into different poses. He framed those pictures under glass and then photographed his own pictures. The bullets broke the glass and penetrated the image of the artist in the middle of the jump.
This work was entitled The Triumph of Death, quoted explicitly Triumph of deaththe famous painting by Pieter Bruegel the Elder. This means, Boni himself worked from a recognized lineage: he took an icon from art history and brought it into the present with a radical and personal gesture.. There was reference, there was context, and there was creation.
La Chola Poblete, more than twenty years later, did exactly the same thing: she photographed herself jumping, wearing a black suit, framed herself under glass and then took her own picture. The work was titled “The Conquest of Death”, a direct echo of Bonnie’s title, almost like a side step within the same concept. The bullets, as in Bonnie, shattered the glass and punctured the picture. There are no differences in style, materials or optical device. Similarity is not inspiration: it is repetition.
This contrasts with other cases where explicit adaptation produces new and powerful works. Victor Grippoanother great Argentine conceptual artist, made one of his bags in his honor Fortunato La Camera: The light that entered the darkness gently illuminated the fruit inside. There were Lacámera interiors and there was Grippo in the same work: a sum, not a copy.
Fermin EgoyaFor her part, she returned The maid’s awakening to Eduardo Sivori He added as he sat on the edge of the bed no less Fyodor Dostoyevsky Scene monitoring. In both cases, the reference is clear, transparent and creative.
short, Returning is a legitimate act when it is done honestly. Acknowledging the original source is not just a gesture of respect: it enriches the final work and allows the viewer to do so. Understanding the dialogue between past and present. Reinterpretation or vice versa, when done in broad daylight, is not plagiarism: Adds a new voice to the endless artistic conversation.
In the case at hand, there is no amount. There is only a weaker and less powerful version of the foreign idea.