“There may be valid legal reasons behind Anvil’s action. But just because one can sue does not mean one should. This is an ethical issue of which art is the hinge. I do think the issue of power is a problem. Downplaying the inequality here, because after all in the legal arena all is fair game, also downplays the ethical questions of such a lawsuit against an artist and critic who is simply doing his work.”

“Obviously, I disagree that the rights or art of the artists in the anthology were eroded by Adam David’s work, which I confess I enjoyed before its final conceptualization, that is, its erasure (I have not yet read the anthology). As a critical gesture, the reuse of sentences is valid. As a conceptual gesture, the reuse of sentences is also valid. But above all, the use of others’ art to craft art is simply a time-honored, old-fashioned, in fact hoary matter of art. The history of art tells us too often art is a form of appropriation.”

“We are too jaded when we declare: let a lawsuit run its course. It’s too heavy a bludgeon. I am not so sure if all workers of art are also not somehow eroded, our horizons diminished when the grievance of the powerful outlaws art. I respect everyone involved in this upsetting affair. There are too many other sad things going on in the world, and this issue is very minor in the scheme of things. But I simply wish to state my support for Adam David in this matter, with all due respect to all the artists involved.”

Read the text in entirety here.