When Work Resembles Another Artist’s – A Guide for Visual Art Students

Should Visual Arts Students Be Notified When Their Work Resembles Another Artist’s, or Should They Discover This for Themselves?

We have all attended exhibitions where comments are made about how similar work is to another artist. It is a particular risk in graduate shows, and is met with a conundrum… Is it the role of lecturers to point this out to students, or is this something that is accepted as part of development and is tolerated with the hope that post-college a student will discover an individual voice?

This essay will explore this, and look to finding a balance which allows students to be creative and at the same time develop an individual voice, and an understanding of the historical context that they place their work within.

——

The question of whether visual arts students should be notified when their work resembles that of another artist raises important considerations about education, creativity, and artistic growth. This debate involves the value of self-discovery, the importance of contextualising one’s work within the broader artistic landscape, and the risks of unintentionally perpetuating derivative practices. A nuanced approach that balances guidance with autonomy may be most effective in helping students navigate their artistic journey.

There are strong arguments for notifying students when their work closely resembles that of another artist. Firstly, such notification helps students develop an awareness of art history and artistic context. Understanding how their work relates to established artists or movements situates their practice within the ongoing dialogues of the art world. For instance, recognising a similarity to Damien Hirst’s conceptual art or Barbara Hepworth’s sculptural forms might prompt students to explore the underlying techniques and philosophies of those works, enriching their creative process.

Secondly, being informed about these resemblances can help students avoid unintentional plagiarism. In many cases, students might unknowingly create works that replicate or heavily echo existing styles, ideas, or even the work of their lecturers. This is particularly common in the early stages of artistic training, where students naturally absorb the influences around them, including those of their teachers. Without intervention, they may unconsciously replicate their lecturers’ techniques or even specific works, blurring the line between homage and mimicry. While this might be tolerated within the educational environment, it could hinder their growth as independent artists and lead to criticism in professional settings.

Thirdly, notification provides students with an opportunity for reflection and growth. By examining why their work mirrors that of another artist or teacher—whether due to shared themes, stylistic choices, or technical limitations—students can push their practice in new, original directions. For example, if a student is repeatedly working in a style identical to their lecturer’s, identifying this early allows them to consciously experiment with alternatives, fostering a more distinctive artistic voice.

Furthermore, the art world is likely to recognise when a student’s work is derivative, whether of an established artist or a teacher. While curators and critics may extend leniency to student work, this will not carry over into their post-graduation careers. If graduates continue to produce work that appears unoriginal or overly reliant on their lecturers’ style, it could severely limit their professional opportunities. Early intervention during their studies can help students refine their practice and avoid being pigeonholed as derivative.

Lastly, this process can serve as a valuable teaching moment. Educators can use instances of resemblance to encourage students to delve deeper into their influences, analysing both the similarities and the ways in which they might diverge. This critical engagement not only enriches their understanding of the artist or lecturer in question but also helps them refine their own practice.

On the other hand, there are valid reasons to allow students to discover these parallels for themselves. Self-discovery can be an empowering and transformative part of the learning process, teaching students how to critically evaluate their influences and situate their work within the broader art world. Rather than relying on external prompts, students develop the skills to independently identify and navigate issues of originality and influence.

Moreover, allowing students the freedom to explore without intervention encourages experimentation and creative risk-taking. If students are frequently notified about resemblances to other artists or their lecturers, they might become overly cautious or preoccupied with avoiding comparisons. This could stifle their willingness to explore new ideas or push boundaries. Instead, discovering such parallels on their own fosters a more organic and personal approach to artistic development.

Art itself is inherently iterative, and many artists revisit, reinterpret, or unintentionally echo the works of others. By navigating these overlaps independently, students gain a deeper appreciation for the complexities of influence and originality. They also learn to critically assess their own work and its relationship to other practices, which is an essential skill for any artist.

Finally, excessive emphasis on resemblance—whether to famous artists or lecturers—can place undue pressure on students. Constantly being reminded of comparisons might undermine their confidence or lead them to prioritise avoiding similarity over genuine self-expression. A more supportive approach might involve allowing students to explore their ideas freely, even if that means discovering such parallels later.

A balanced approach may be the most effective way to address this issue. Students could be notified in cases where the resemblance is particularly pronounced, whether it is to a well-known artist, a lecturer, or a movement. This notification should be framed as an educational opportunity rather than a critique, encouraging students to engage critically with the artist or lecturer’s work and explore how they can differentiate their own practice.

At the same time, educators can foster a culture of self-discovery by equipping students with the tools to analyse their influences and identify similarities independently. Assignments that encourage students to trace their artistic inspirations, compare their work with others, or critique their own practice can help them develop a more nuanced understanding of originality. This balanced approach ensures that students receive the guidance they need while maintaining the freedom to explore their ideas.

The question of whether visual arts students should be notified about similarities in their work is complex, particularly when their work may unintentionally replicate the styles or ideas of their lecturers. While notification can provide valuable context and opportunities for growth, self-discovery fosters autonomy and confidence. However, it is important to recognise that leniency extended to students will not apply after graduation. Continuing to produce derivative work, whether of established artists or lecturers, can severely limit professional opportunities. A balanced approach that combines guidance with opportunities for independent exploration offers the best of both worlds, preparing students to navigate the complexities of the art world while cultivating their unique artistic voice.