Artist

Can Andy Warhol Be an Artist?

          There is an argument that whether we should acknowledge the commercial or public arts as pure fine arts. To tell the truth, I would say it is not accord with reason to accept Andy Warhol’s ‘Orange Marilyn Print’ as an untainted pure art. It is not so anymore surprising that a variety of popular paintings such as Vincent van Gogh’s ‘The Starry Night’ are commonly stood at the luxury hotel’s main lobby. Almost, actually all of those pieces were given a birth from a mass reproductive mechanism, which are now abundantly utilized. As Benjamin argues in his article, the modern art stands for the destruction of the aura. (Benjamin) That is to say, the art is surrounded with its unique quality that cannot be duplicated or emulated. There is another theorist who had come up with different approach about this mechanism. Theodor Adorno argues that the classic art with the aura (Adorno) holds more priceless value than the commercial or public paintings. For both of these ideas, my claim is slightly lean toward Adorno’s idea. That being said, people should perceive that pure uniqueness within arts should be sustained and I partially agree with that photography and camera ruined the artistry itself.      

             As compared to the past, people are now living in the highly developed era in terms of technology. We can easily take a snapshot in the presence of magnificent Angkor Wat temple in the Cambodia or ancient Greek sculpture with a small digital camera. This hi-tech opportunity leads people to exploit an artistic picture as their Windows background. I am not trying to be pessimistic regarding this vast technological glory, rather I have been anxious that as process is getting easier and easier for approaching to the value of arts, it would be directing toward the collapse of art, unless people reasonably comprehend the value of art, which are the exquisiteness and the exclusiveness. Nowadays, Andy Warhol’s paintings have been dealing at the art auction with very high prices. That is why the majority of contemporary artists are pretty much enthusiastic about earning more profits by selling their invaluable works. Some people would criticize that the mass reproduction offers the opportunity to experience valuable art without difficulty, so that it is ultimately excellent resultingly. People feel different sentiment while staring at genuine Mona Lisa and duplicated one. What makes this feeling differ? Adorno says it comes from the aura. (Adorno)

             Another feature of the modern mass culture is that it is subordinated by the capitalism and then the works of art are transformed to the cultural industry. This eventually leads to the standardization of the art, also called the mass reproduction. Even if it looks like innovative bits and pieces are coming up, things turn out as same particle. Documentary about Che Guevara is good example showing how the mass reproductive mechanism is contributing to the world. (Lopez) His portrait represents the revolutionary icon and people can see his image everywhere. People wear his t-shirt, but some of them do not know who this guy is. Che was a great leader who led Cuban Revolution successfully. However, I suddenly come up with idea that his achievements is out of sight because of commercial reproduction of his photograph. There is another example revealing negative effects of mass reproduction. The progress of video equipments system mostly guided Fascist and Nazis to abuse the technological magnificence. They edited propaganda films dexterously to persevere their interests. So, this politicization of art well represents Adorno’s thought.      

             In conclusion, I believe mass reproduction of artistic value influences people negatively. Primarily, it hurts the unique value of art itself. As I stated above, the advance of high technology allow people to experience a visit to a museum with a personal laptop. I believe this will not be able to touch deeply, that is people cannot experience the aura with largely reproduced Che’s portrait t-shirt. Also, untainted art cannot be constant, as long as capitalism is involved. Profit influences the artist nowadays, and it is ruining the true value of their potential masterpieces. I do not think Andy Warhol is an exclusive artist in a broad sense that he takes advantage of his value on earning money.     

 Work Cited

Adorno and Horkheimer. “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception”. Book

Benjamin, Walter. "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." (2005) Web. 25 Jan. 2012.

Lopez, Loise, dir. "Chevolution." Dir. Trisha Ziff. Web. 25 Jan 2012.