i always wondered why warhol is so famous. is it b/c he was at the right place at the right time surrounded by the right (famous) people "or" is it b/c he is considered a truly great artist. warhol is one of those people that everyone has heard of, but can your typical person off the street tell you much about him, probably not. more so than an artist, i think warhol was a genius in marketing. through the commercial driven massproduction and way that he marketed his works to the famous, put his name out more so than any artist of the last 50 years. what's your take?
posted by:
|
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Sat, July 24, 2004 - 11:15 AMok...i guess nobody knows or cares LOL.
Anyway, while I have the floor....>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you are anti Meathead (jock,frat,sorority, etc.),
JOIN
MEATHEADS.tribe.net
SEE YOU THERE~~~~~
-
Unsu...
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Fri, July 30, 2004 - 12:56 PMhe is (to me) the one that created the idea in the gallery scene that bullshitting is more important than talent. -
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Sat, July 31, 2004 - 7:19 PMso very true...like i said, more of a marketing genius than an art genius -
-
Unsu...
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Mon, August 2, 2004 - 10:56 AMheheh i was bitched out a few months ago for posting some of the same things. however i took a more negative approach and called him the death of credibility for the art world. -
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Mon, August 2, 2004 - 6:54 PMPlease excuse my warhol soapbox; I wrote my dissertation on him and so have very particular ideas.
I think part of the problem of looking at warhol is that many people are trapped in the notion of 'genius' in regards to craft. Craft is only one small portion of artmaking- and no matter how skilled you are at painting, photo, sculpture- whatever medium floats your boat- if your ideas don't work within the context of that form, your art is going to be crap. Warhol helped move us out of the age of individual Master and into a place that is conceptual. His ideas (that American culture worshipped mass-marketed and produced commodity) wouldn't have made sense if he were meticulously and individually painting each of his soup cans by hand. Once he got to the screenprinting/Factory phase, he realized that was what the idea needed.
Have y'all read Sol Lewitt's writings on conceptual art? You can find them at
www.altx.com/vizarts/conceptual.html . I refer to them at least weekly if not more. Two of the sentences I think apply to Warhol particularly well:
17. All ideas are art if they are concerned with art and fall within the conventions of art.
19.The conventions of art are altered by works of art.
Warhol turned marketing (of everything from shoes to soup to celebrity to himself) into art. He helped move art into a more conceptual place, one that allowed the 70s performance and conceptualism to flourish. For that, I will always be indebted to him and his work. -
-
Unsu...
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Tue, August 3, 2004 - 6:55 AM>>>>Craft is only one small portion of artmaking.
no, skill and craft are all that art should ever be. -
-
Unsu...
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Tue, August 3, 2004 - 6:57 AM>>>>- if your ideas don't work within the context of that form, your art is going to be crap.
if you are a skilled artist intouch with their craft this is not a possibility. however if you are an unskilled artist that walks on bullshit your art is crap despite the marketability of your message.
the problem is the bullshit now outweights the craft and people seem incapable of discerning where one begins and the other ends, in his case.
-
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Tue, August 3, 2004 - 3:55 PMSt.Jman...very interesting take...I think I get what you are saying, but could you ellaborate on your last post a little more. I agree with the last statement you made. It seems in Warhols case(at least for all the artists I know), people just accept him b/c he is Warhol. The fame or bullshit does outweigh the craft.
Warhol has always baffled me
+Is he considered so amazing b/c he had the idea of creating art that anyone can recognize?
+Is he so great b/c he got in good with celebrities and icons of the time?
Should Warhol be recognized as a great artist or a great communicator? His famous works are not necessarily the most skilled/crafted pieces...they are just easy to relate to and give that "Why didn't I think of that" impression. I'll give him credit for his grand ideas, but not his skill or craft. -
-
Unsu...
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Wed, August 4, 2004 - 6:49 AMhe should be recognised for the same things PT Barnum was... a master bullshitter and showman. however what he did to the laymans (and to some extent artists like myself) is decrease the overall credibility of art and the motivation for art.
we could go into the "artist sweatshop" scam, we could talk about insincere shock art for the sake of shock instead of art, we could talk about a wide range of permissiveness that came out of the gallery cliques that developed around warhol and the 60's counter cultural movement... there are so many things that were effected by his "bullshit factory".
where to begin, where to begin?
at a certain point however, you have to divorce yourself from the bullshit and ask... "did andy warhol give as much to the art world as he took from it, or tore down?" i for one say the later rather than the former. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
-
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Thu, August 5, 2004 - 2:55 PMSt. Jman,
I think we are outcasts in here for not buying into the Warhol obcession. Oh well-hehe. -
-
Unsu...
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Fri, August 6, 2004 - 7:24 AMsoon you will feel their wrath hahahha.
be prepared to be innundated with prefab art derrived from coke binges. -
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Tue, November 23, 2004 - 5:48 PMyou have to ask your self, if any of the pop art movement was genius,
i think , talent and conspect , but wharhol considered him self, a portait artist
that what he did for a living, but most of the people he did portait of where
famous like mick jagger ,truman capolity ect
-
-
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Sun, October 30, 2005 - 8:44 PMand you don't even have a main photo.............hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. hehe.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Mon, October 31, 2005 - 6:30 AMi find that fucking hilarious that you think there was ever "credibility" in the art world......
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Fri, December 10, 2004 - 12:01 PMYes, I agree. He was able to glam onto the celebs of the moment and ride off of their interest in his art. In fact, he more than likely shaped his style to their likes and dislikes. Eclectic, though he was, I think it was the star status of those he got to know that propelled him. -
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Thu, December 16, 2004 - 12:27 AMhuh? celebrities like Henry Geldzhaler and Leo Castelli? Those were the people who supported him initially. And yes, they were extraordinarily influential figures in the art world, but that was before the art world HAD celebrities.
the celebrity involvement in the factory didn't happen until well after he was established- the original celebrity portraits were of his film icons (troy donahue, elvis, liz taylor) who didn't yet know him. All of the Marilyn Monroes were done as part of his 'death and destruction' series, AFTER she died. Same with Jackie Kennedy.
And his first commissioned portrait was of a ny socialite, NOT a celebrity (though in true warhol form, she's now famous for being the first commissioned warhol portrait). And that didn't happen until the late 60s I believe. -
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Sun, December 19, 2004 - 3:39 PMif you new andy ,and his real inner circle .he collected for his own art collection, classic renaissance art his personal collection was very traditional
-
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Mon, October 31, 2005 - 6:26 PMyou have got to be fucking kidding!
-
-
Re: warhol hmmmm....
Sun, October 30, 2005 - 8:41 PMhi,
at the risk of sounding rude, i'm starting to think some people just "get" warhol, and some don't. i don't "get" tiger woods, but i respect that he's very good at something, even though i could care less.
warhol was a fucking prophet. he spit in the fucking eye of everything that came before him. do you "get" iggy pop and his contribution to everthing that went after him?..................ron.
