When we went to the walker I fell right in love with andy worhols "16 Jackies".
The reason was because I'm a huge fan of Andy Worhol and because I loved what the "16 Jackies" portraid. It showed how you can go from being happy to sad in a split second, how your emotions can change in a split second. We talked about how people wouldnt concider it art because he didnt make it, but the thing is he had the idea, if it wasnt for the idea that peice of art work would never have existed. "What confirms his Modernist chops is the integral power of the images and objects that resulted from his deconstructing."(http://artscenecal.com/ArticlesFile/Archive/Articles2002/Articles0502/AWarholB4.html)
This is what i'm talking about, the reason he made this art work was to get some feelings/some emotions out of people. To have them look at it and think about it. I agree, because even if your doing it art for art sake, your still going to make people think about what they are looking at. Which is what every artist should do.
You (and your source author Peter Frank) are making an interesting case for the Modernist motivations and the nature of Warhol's work here, Sam. But instead of having the reader do most of the work, why don't you dig a little deeper into the article yourself and let Frank really inform your argument...
ReplyDelete