<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Banapana &#187; Andy Warhol</title>
	<atom:link href="http://banapana.com/tag/andy-warhol/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://banapana.com</link>
	<description>This is your mind on media.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:34:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Is Graphic Design Art?</title>
		<link>http://banapana.com/creative-communism/is-graphic-design-art</link>
		<comments>http://banapana.com/creative-communism/is-graphic-design-art#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:25:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Russell Warner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Creative Communism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andy Warhol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[graphic design]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://banapana.com/?p=554</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First of all, free free to answer the question for yourself. It&#8217;s not what I would consider the most scientific study, but que sera sera. I draw a distinction between graphic design and art based on what is being communicated and what is the intent of the communication. Art attempts to communicate emotion, it evokes [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all, free free to <a href="http://isgraphicdesignart.com/">answer the question for yourself</a>.  It&#8217;s not what I would consider the most scientific study, but que sera sera.  I draw a distinction between graphic design and art based on what is being communicated and what is the intent of the communication.  Art attempts to communicate emotion, it evokes feeling.  Graphic design has to communicate information&#8212;and I emphasize <em>has</em> to.  If an artifact of the visual medium does not communicate information (or data, to be technical about it) then it is not graphic design.  When information is communicated it <em>can</em> sometimes be done with excellence, and graphic designers want to call that art (because it is <em>their</em> art, as in trade) but other folks will still call it technical or design or advertising.  But when the emotional content outweighs the communication of the information, as in, drowns it out, then I think graphic design can attain &#8220;artness.&#8221; And mind you, I am not saying the reverse of this: that art has nothing to say.  On the contrary, art can say nothing at all or nothing specific.  In my mind, a great deal of the cleaving of the two forms comes down to Andy Warhol&#8217;s &#8220;Soup Can&#8221; and an actual advertisement for the same soup.  One form is trying to get you to think about your world, what it looks like and how it feels.  The other form is trying to get you to think about soup. [Thanks to <a href="http://kitblog.com">Kitblog</a> for today's inspiration!]</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://banapana.com/creative-communism/is-graphic-design-art/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>There is No Aesthetic Anymore</title>
		<link>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/there-is-no-aesthetic-anymore</link>
		<comments>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/there-is-no-aesthetic-anymore#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2007 16:30:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andy Warhol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Olen Butler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[simulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.banapana.com/culturejamming/there-is-no-aesthetic-anymore</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I received the honor of having lunch with Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Robert Olen Butler a few days ago and it was a refreshing experience. It is always enlightening in some way to meet with a truly passionate person&#8211;even when you disagree with them. Butler has developed for himself, I think, a very inventive and useful [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I received the honor of having lunch with Pulitzer Prize-winning writer <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Olen_Butler">Robert Olen Butler</a> a few days ago and it was a refreshing experience.  It is always enlightening in some way to meet with a truly passionate person&#8211;even when you disagree with them.  Butler has developed for himself, I think, a very inventive and useful way to get to the heart of stories; namely, to focus on that which every human being innately has: their desire.  He likes to say &#8220;yearning&#8221;.</p>

<p><span id="more-253"></span></p>

<p>Boy, does he like to say &#8220;yearning.&#8221;  But what has struck me as astounding, what has stuck with me these past few days, is that he has taken his tool and claims that he, alone ((His contempt for the &#8220;establishment&#8221;&mdash;the majority of English departments in the US is commendable.  He claims that writers have the creative element of writing fiction robbed from them.  In fact he said, writers &#8220;that I meet know the second through tenth thing about writing, but they don&#8217;t know the first thing.&#8221; and went on to tell us all that none of us, he was willing to wager, could give him a story that would possess &#8220;yearning&#8221;.  I will leave the opinion of the existence of &#8220;yearning&#8221; in my own work as <a href="http://troped.com/macabre-pabulum/">an excercise to the reader</a>.)) can identify what constitutes art&mdash;<em>real</em> art!  At this point you might be able to guess that the thing that constitutes <em>real</em> art is yearning.</p>

<p>There&#8217;s little question in my mind that he is absolutely correct when it comes to the idea of a character&#8217;s desire being a central and important feature of most good writing.  But it hardly applies to other artforms like architecture or music, which to me, makes it suspect as a qualification for art.  Moreover, the art of storytelling has rendered many tales that easily belong in any canon that may not even have a human for a central character.  ((They might be a <a href="http://troped.com/yackyacks/">cat</a> for instance, or a <a href="http://troped.com/unreal-city/">city</a>.))  Regardless, the main difficulty I have with his attempts to define what constitutes good fiction is just that it isn&#8217;t fuzzy.  That&#8217;s the best way I&#8217;d been able to put it until this morning when I stumbled (again) into this quote from Baudrillard:</p>

<blockquote>Everything is political.  Everything is aesthetic.  All at once&#8230;  everything is now aestheticized: politics is aestheticized in the spectacle, sex in advertising and porn, and all kinds of activity in what is conventionally referred to as culture&#8230; When everything is aesthetic, nothing is beautiful or ugly anymore, and art itself disappears.&#8221;</blockquote>

<p>Thank my <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacrum">simulation of God</a> for Baudrillard!  THAT&#8217;s why you can&#8217;t define art as <em>this</em> and not that.  There just isn&#8217;t any such thing anymore.  Andy Warhol jammed &lt;a rel=&#8221;lightbox&#8221; href=&#8217;http://www.banapana.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/warhol.jpg&#8217; title=&#8217;Campbell&#8217;s Soup Can&#8217;>that soup can</a> up there and we were off.  Even commercial products have become art.  The smart businesses have merely moved on from producing items that function into the realm of forms. Good profit margins come from the aesthetics of <a href="http://www.apple.com/itunes/">music players</a>, <a href="http://www.apple.com">computers</a>, and <a href="http://www.dyson.com/">vacuum cleaners</a>. ((I&#8217;ve made this point a more thoroughly in <a href="/good-design-is-profitable">Good Design is Profitable</a>.)) Many high concept artists might poo-poo the idea of the iPod constituting art, but then they also probably own one so we know that they paid a premium for it, and doesn&#8217;t that really say all we need to know?</p>

<p>The long and the short of it, write whatever the hell you want.  It will be art, period.  We live in a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-postmodern">post-postmodern</a> world.  ((I gagged a little bit on that last phrase.))</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://banapana.com/uncategorized/there-is-no-aesthetic-anymore/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
