Andy Warhol’s pop art legacy
Introduction
It is inevitable that each era has its art. In pop art, a young commercial illustrator called Andy Warhol who reflects in his works a stage marked by consumerism, whose central idea was a precise, thick and controversial line between fine art and commercial aesthetics,.
Developing
Andrew Warhola, known as Andy Warhol, was born on August 6, 1928 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. After Warhol graduated in 1949 from the School of Fine Arts he went to New York to pursue his dream of becoming a commercial artist. He got a job in Glamor magazine and became one of the most successful commercial artists in the 50s. His unique and capricious style used in his proposals made him worthy of several industry awards. In the creation of his art he used his own techniques such as the stained line (Blotted Line) and the rubber stamps (Aguirre, 2008).
In his last years, Warhol suffered from several chronic diseases including problems with his gallbladder. On February 20, 1987 he was admitted to the New York Hospital where his gallbladder was removed. Although he seemed to recover, days later he had complications that resulted in unexpected cardiac arrest and died at 58 years. Warhol died on February 22, 1987 in New York (Aguirre, 2008).
Art Pop and Andy Warhol-Lead
Andy Warhol was one of the most prolific and popular artistic of his time, forming part of the pop-art movement based on some way on highly commercial sensibilities. Very controversial invention for its time, pop art was born, as an idea, as a concept, as a label, in the 60s and 70s. Suddenly, to the two stages of art – Modernism and postmodernism, thus identified currents such as Futurism and Dadaism – another more was added, the pop art, of which he gave faith almost immediately, through the figure of the insecure, frivolous and little charismatic Andy Warhol, creator of the iconic Campbell’s soup tar. And, well, before he is Deschamps, considered by many the pioneer of pop art and irreverence.
From that moment on, Warhol’s works became a legacy worldwide: there were paintings that represented articles of real life such as Coca-Cola, vacuum and hamburgers;The portraits that represented famous celebrities such as Marlyn Monroe, Elizabeth Taylor, Mick Jagger, Mao Tse-Tung and Elvis Presley and others that were movies-specially video art-represented the American society of the 60s 60s. Many of them strongly discredited since their critics lamented the decline of aesthetics, threatened by the sense of commercialization, profit and excessive benefit. They were times, because of an absence of respect for the fundamental principles of art – according to their adversaries.
Accepted and popularized the theme, form and technique, Andy Warhol’s pop art and his followers evolved in the following decades according to the increasingly open artistic permissiveness. Thus, the representation of simple everyday objects, celebrities and famous characters became argumentary premises that the same could give us impressive paintings (cans from Campbells, 1962; Velvet Underground & Nico, 1967; Absolut Vodka, 1986, Diamond Dust Shoe,1980;) that more than 60 unfortunate films without practically a script (eating, 1963 and sleep, 1964), simple sculptures and photographs or controversial television programs where he stood out as host. In addition, in 1970, Warhol continued to explore different forms or means of expression. The Philosophy of Andy Warhol. This is how andy Warhol’s legacy (Colorado Nates, 2016) is.
An issue that frequently comes in Andy Warhol’s works was the celebrity. I mean celebrity portraits that, by force as a result, made more popularity in art. These portraits are impregnated within pop art loaded with bright and striking colors-such as Shot Marilyns (1964)-, in a single color-Orange Prince (1984)-, of repeated figures –triple elvis (1963), Double Elvis (1963) -, or even himself-camouflage author (1986). As these portraits acquired fame and notoriety, Warhol began receiving thousands of commissions for the portraits of celebrities and characters of society (Llopico, 2012).
Socio -historical, cultural and arts context
Although Warhol’s art was born in the time of modernism, its concepts were totally opposite: in modernism, aesthetic principles are, first of all, which dominates art for many generations. Modernism emphasizes the feeling, in the noble, in hierarchical convictions and especially in good taste (Vidales, 2016), but in pop art it dominates rather the irreverent before traditionalist aesthetics. Warhol hugged what the modernists had deliberately ignored or despised in recent years for years. For many his ‘art’ was not distinguished from advertising, which meant that he was rude and banal and, therefore, ridiculous. The modernism dizque based on seriousness and aesthetics was offended by the artist’s frivolous attitudes. Of course it was a slap for those infiltrated in the myths of modernism. Moreover, the most serious problem was that their celebrations of the inconsequential were being taken seriously in the art world (imaginary, 2010).
Warhol’s art gives rise to the post modernism of the sixties. As many observers now agree, this decade marks the beginning of a postmodern sensitivity, where the modernist desire for aesthetic closure and autonomy was quickly replaced by indeterminacy and eclecticism (Soley-Beltran, 2017). If that is true, Warhol’s artistic forecast propelled the changes that were happening. Thus, his art anticipated many tactics of this new aesthetic world, including the emphasis on irony, banality and even communism, as well as the promotion of intellectual commitment through denial (imaginary, 2010).
Thus, Warhol is a transition figure in art history. Of course, his work is a reference. Criticism about your work converge with what is in the center of the modern / postmodern debate. As a ‘mirror of that time’, Warhol’s critic reflects concern and enthusiasm in response to changing paradigms.
critics
The criticism of Warhol and his work were many and there were all kinds and under any pretext. For example, Willem de Kooning described him as “an art murderer, a beauty killer, and even a laughter of laughter’ (Libedinsky, 2019). Of course Kooning was not the only one who critic Warhol, Robert Hughes expresses him as the artist who desecrated celebrity culture and was the pioneer to turn art into a business, which made him morally reprehensible and of course, of course,An aesthetic fraud. British artist Richard Hamilton described the pop art as “popular, temporary, replaceable, low -cost, produced by mass or series, in itself it is a big business (Espinoza, 2010)."Not for nothing, his portrait" Eight Elvises "eventually resorted to $ 100 million in 2008, making the most valuable painting in history (Khoi, 2009).
Thus, his work was so rejected by some that, in 1956, Andy donated one of his works (Shoe: Shoe) to the Museum of Modern Art in New York, but Alfred H. Bar Jr., The director of the museum collections at that time wrote a letter rejecting his (gift!) work due to the limited storage and gallery space of the museum and explained “we must return the gifts that are unlikely to be exhibited.”Paradoxically, the Museum of Modern Art has 168 Warhol works exhibiting as a private collection that even includes the work Shoe (shoe).
If it is not yet understood because the artist was so controversial, let me tell you that some of Andy’s most famous movies are "sleep" and eat. In "Sleep" the poet John Giorno is presented by sleeping for six hours and in "Eating" a man eating a mushroom for 45 minutes (Menand, 2010) is presented. Now it is understood because it was so controversial?
Even the serious problems were not oblivious to Warhol. In 1968, Warhol’s career almost ends. Valerie Solanas, an aspiring writer and a radical feminist, shot her. Warhol was seriously injured in this attack. Solanas appeared in one of Warhol’s films and bothered because he refused to use dialogues she would have written. After shooting him, Solanas was arrested and then declared himself guilty of the crime. Warhol spent weeks at the New York hospital recovering from his wounds and then operated several times. As a result of his wounds, he had to use a surgical corset for the rest of his life (Álvarez, 2019).
While the controversy around Warhol’s work still does not end, three interconnected issues occupy a prominent place in disagreements about Warhol’s reputation: his personality, his originality and his physical appearance.
Originality
Of course, the originality of his works was always in question. He was considered a fraud and defined him as the poison in the heart of Warhol’s legacy. According to research, it is believed that most of his work in the 70s were carried out in studies that he never visited. He simply sent the tempering of the paintings and the instructions on how it should be printed, then the study sent them over and he only dedicated himself to putting his signature. Thus, Warhol began the paradoxical methods of "the factory", and depended on them. La Factory becomes a company that produced in series. So Warhol is considered a mixture of Picasso and Henry Ford. His art is rarely moving, but it is an icon of popular culture.”(From Segovia, 2018).
That is why it is difficult to authenticate their works because they could easily be reproduced more than once in those studies. Of course, many of these works have false firms. The prices to which their works are currently sold are phenomenal. When erase from his creations, he minimized the artist’s responsibility, the importance of talent and the value of originality, this self-denial of responsibility was considered little ethical, if not subversive, by the critical audience, which fed fuel more the controversy over whether hiswork should be considered or not as art (Ortíz, 2013). Even more, Warhol challenged the presumptions about what art is supposed to be and how it is experienced. Of course, the questions arise. How authentic are these works that are sold in millions of dollars? Are they actually genuine?
Personality
In addition, his personality also helped his continuous criticisms. The problematic nature of Warhol’s critical reputation is attributable, in part, to the evasive and equivocal person he cultivated: the calculated indifference, the monosyllabic replica, the flat and empty affection. And while it is true that he suffered from weakening shyness, however, he delighted in bewildering his critics. When reviewing Warhol’s life, it is often impossible to distinguish the authentic Warhol of the act. As a result, an important part of the critical response addresses, even if it is anecdotally, its personality. And with little what is reliable to continue, critics have enjoyed broad freedom to generate great inventions around him (Rosen, 2018).
In addition, his comments did not help. In his speeches there were parallel narratives: art as an artistic way of expression and another, art as a business. Without a doubt, Warhol’s comments about art, which should be effortless.
Physical appearance
His physical appearance was also strongly questioned. Andy is a grayish guy, skinny and with clothes that are too tight to his body for that time. Apparently, he left the conventional norms of society. Although he never recognized his sexual orientation, although he never married, many questioned his personal life. According to Segovia (2018) “it seems homosexual, but he never recognized him. The "problem", as he called homosexuality, was always from others. Some with whom he had disdain, call him asexual, other bisexual, but given his aversion to physical intimacy, it was rather a mirror than someone sexually active."He said until 1980 that he was a virgin.
Paradoxes in your thinking
Both Warhol’s life and his work simultaneously satanized and celebrated materiality and celebrity. On the other hand, his paintings of distorted images of brands and the distorted faces of celebrities could be read as a criticism of what he lived, saw, felt and heard. It is a representation of an obsessed culture with money and celebrity. On the other hand, Warhol’s approach on commercial products and icons of pop culture, also as their own taste for money and fame, suggest a life in celebration of the many aspects of American culture, strongly criticized in theirplays. It seemed that neither he was satisfied with this life, paradoxically his own life. Warhol spoke of this apparent contradiction between his life and his work in his book The Philosophy of Andy Warhol, written where he establishes that “making money is an art and working is an art, and the products of business or commercials are the best ofthe arts.”(Salazar, 2018).
In the current controversy, Warhol’s reputation still depends on the ideological or historical concerns of critic’s art. If, as suggested, Warhol managed to redefine the artistic experience, then the critical response also required redefinition. In retrospect, it seems that a problem confronted by critics and journalists was that the established critical approaches simply did not lend themselves to an art that they perceived as ‘without art, without style and anonym. While the images with which Warhol stumbled have a deep resonance with the public, the problem of interpreting them is, according to the point of view, simple or complex. But not that consists of art?
conclusion
Thus, criticism has been the "normal" state in the life and work of Andy Warhol. Well, many or not like, Andy’s controversial figure will continue to be a reference of art for many generations and for many even will always be an example to be avoided – or to avoid. In addition, regardless of what is thought about him, there is his work and his work, to which any critic of the art of the 60s has to review from time to time, it is his portraits of celebrities, his paintings of commercial products,His films, his books or his sculptures.
Perhaps Andy, he had no right to live as he would like to live. Critics always made him think that he was a failed, that the art world did not understand it, that his work was not appreciated by anyone, that it was only money. But, he preferred to think otherwise -his art was worthy. And that, on the contrary, he was a complete artist, a different artist, an artist without rules or norms. And that, of course, "was not a failed". And that criticism does not matter, that one must fight to win, although the others think differently.
Leave feedback