I have more issues with Warhol because even though he embraced Duchamp's idea, I think his actual work is just weak and created more for his own marketing efforts. You can say, well the people like it so its really not warhols fault, but again i would point to the marketing machine that Warhol was and his ability to stir controversy. He was doing what banksy and 50 Cent do now for the same reasons (Fame and or Fortune) IMO.
Warhol helped create the "Artist/Art" Fusion. Where one cant separate the two ala....
I'm pretty sure the cult of personality came well before Warhol.
Of course. Dali had that draw/appeal.
Im really referring to the TV age. "Helped" is the word.
I have more issues with Warhol because even though he embraced Duchamp's idea, I think his actual work is just weak and created more for his own marketing efforts. You can say, well the people like it so its really not warhols fault, but again i would point to the marketing machine that Warhol was and his ability to stir controversy. He was doing what banksy and 50 Cent do now for the same reasons (Fame and or Fortune) IMO.
Warhol helped create the "Artist/Art" Fusion. Where one cant separate the two ala....
I'm pretty sure the cult of personality came well before Warhol.
Of course. Dali had that draw/appeal.
Im really referring to the TV age. "Helped" is the word.
The difference with Warhol though is that his work is basically nothing more than a commodified version of his personality, or the celebrity therein. Sure, the 'cult of personality' existed before Warhol, but he did something previously unaccomplished with it. He used silkscreened prints as a primary medium. Silkscreens are incredibly easy to produce, especially when their content is appropriated images with minimal amounts of colors. Warhol's work offered little aesthetically, not to say that it was aesthetically poor, and instead served as a document through which he critiqued the 'art world' specifically, or the world at large more generally Debord really got to the issue before Warhol, but he did it with a book instead of art objects. Sorry if that has all been said already, as I didn't read too closely.
33, just for details sake, while Duchamp claimed he had given up art for chess he was secretly toiling away on Etant donnes.
Duchamp taught Cage to play chess. Duchamp loved Dali, and Cage was not into Dali at all.
The difference with Warhol though is that his work is basically nothing more than a commodified version of his personality, or the celebrity therein. Sure, the 'cult of personality' existed before Warhol, but he did something previously unaccomplished with it.
Comments
Of course. Dali had that draw/appeal.
Im really referring to the TV age. "Helped" is the word.
The difference with Warhol though is that his work is basically nothing more than a commodified version of his personality, or the celebrity therein. Sure, the 'cult of personality' existed before Warhol, but he did something previously unaccomplished with it. He used silkscreened prints as a primary medium. Silkscreens are incredibly easy to produce, especially when their content is appropriated images with minimal amounts of colors. Warhol's work offered little aesthetically, not to say that it was aesthetically poor, and instead served as a document through which he critiqued the 'art world' specifically, or the world at large more generally Debord really got to the issue before Warhol, but he did it with a book instead of art objects. Sorry if that has all been said already, as I didn't read too closely.
33, just for details sake, while Duchamp claimed he had given up art for chess he was secretly toiling away on Etant donnes.
Duchamp taught Cage to play chess. Duchamp loved Dali, and Cage was not into Dali at all.
Bingo....