Our study explores the rhetorical demystification of artistic “license” via an analysis of United States Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s dissent in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc., v. Goldsmith et al. (2023). The case question presented revolves around what constitutes transformation in a work of art. Petitioner Warhol argues that his portrait of pop musician Prince, derived from a photograph snapped by Lynn Goldsmith, is transformative. Respondent Goldsmith argues that artist Warhol tampered with, rather than transformed, her original work, depriving her of copyright protection. The Opinion in the case rules for Goldsmith by demystifying artistic cognition while the Dissenting Justices side with Warhol. Of special note is the linguistic way that Justice Elena Kagan advances an implicit theory of art and artists, invoking charismatic terms highlighting the creative, elusive, mysterious nature of artistic cognition. A metaphor sorting chart derived from the official case transcript provides a framework for rhetorical analysis of art in a legal domain.

RQ1: What drives artistic cognition?
RQ2: What are the rhetorical challenges of codifying art in a legal domain?

Authors:
Lin Allen, University of Northern Colorado, United States
Betty Brown, University of Northern Colorado, United States

About the Presenter(s)
Professor Lin Allen is a University Professor/Principal Lecturer at University of Northern Colorado in United States

See this presentation on the full schedule – On Demand Schedule

Bookmark