No Line on the Horizon Artwork Controversy
Artist Taylor Dupree expressed his opinions about the alleged “rip-off” by U2 of his and Richard Chartier’s artwork on “speicifcation.fifteen,” in his blog last week. The cover for No Line on the Horizon is unmistakably similar.
The main thing he points out is that there are no legal issues here. Everyone had permission to create what they were creating and use what they were using, and they all just happened to be using the same photographer (Hiroshi Sugimoto).
So if anyone wants to claim the cover was used in poor judgment (which in itself is debatable), it’s clear the responsibility should have first fallen to Mr. Sugimoto.
At the end of the day, all artists involved should be proud of their work–images that can interchangably be used in a major museum exhibtion and also on a mainstream rock band’s album cover have got to be good.
Last 4 posts by Tassoula
- Videos of Comfort on This Day of Remembrance - September 11th, 2011
- Be in the Know About the Seattle Show - May 28th, 2011
- Pop Culture Throws Wrench in U2 Diet - April 17th, 2011
- Rolling Stone Readers Pick U2 Album as 80s Best - April 2nd, 2011
Yeah, the whole “but we got their fir-rst” vibe of this silly flap is pretty juvenile.
Says the guy who has made many juvenile comments about “Get On Your Boots.”
Oh well.
It’s not that silly of a flap. If someone used similar artwork to a u2 album cover, u2 fan-atics would go ape-shit and there would be articles all over the press about it. What would happen if someone used a black and white photo of a little boy with tussled blond hair on the cover of their album with red, bold letters over the top of it.
That being said, I agree that the artist bears responsibility for this and should have disclosed who else was using that image or similar images as a warning.
I know, I know. I was exaggerating. It’s not remotely silly when the situation has genuine merit–it’s something I have to be sensitive to very often in my professional career. But hey–did the proverbial 50,000 Elvis fans get angry when the Clash swiped the King’s cover concept for their own on “London Calling?” And yeah, that’s different, but not too different.
There was one other OT/unrelated thing that made me laugh out loud at Bono’s arrogance/innocence/whatever, though: the bit in the U2 by U2 book where he’s describing the “Achtung Baby” cover and he says something like “we invented the grid!” It’s too bad that you can’t tell if someone’s joking when their words appear in type.
And of course I’ve ripped off the 16-grid Anton thing many (non-commercial!) times, but…I seriously doubt they were the first geniuses to come up with the concept.
Sounds similar to the CoeXisT artwork from the last album. Seems like artwork sharing is turning into a trend, isn’t it?
Mr. Sugimoto should have been more transparent. I doubt U2 would have chosen the exact same photo if they had known the image was used for an album cover before. Mr. Sugimoto has many very similar photos that could have been used, and this flap could have been avoided.
That said, I’m not all that impressed with the cover… seems to be a better fit for an ambient sounding album and not one full of U2′s most complex work (I’m hoping!).
And, ya know, Anton is pretty good… surely he could have come up with something more, um, original? and a wee bit less bland. No Line on the Horizon… do we need a literal picture of this? And if the answer is “yes we do”, then why not hire a photographer to make it for you, rather than re-use an old picture (that may have been used before?)
The photo used comes from a large series of Sugimoto “sea scapes” from all over the worlds oceans. I agree that they should have at least used a different one than the other artists used. I’ve seen quiet a few and there is even one from the Irish Sea that may have been more fitting or others that had a fog hiding the horizon.
I also agree with Watts that the album cover gives it an ambient feel. I dont mind it…kind of Zen like. Guess we will see if the rest of the album follows it. I’m also surprised Anton Corbjin wasnt used…especially if they were trying to get the black and white Joy Division look.
Bottom line is U2 prides itself on it’s uniqueness. Well, so far “Boots” and the cover are certainly not. With their image team and $$ that’s a shame.
While it’s clear the cover is not unique, it’s not fair to say that “Boots” is certainly unoriginal. In today’s music world, I (along with several other U2 fans around the internet) actually think the song is totally unique.
You know what? I don’t like the cover. I didn’t like it when I didn’t know it was copied from another band. I think they should have done a bit more research when choosing the cover. Mr. Sugimoto should also have had the courtesy of warning U2 the photograph had been used already if he didn’t.