Jump to content

Consumerism - progress or regress?


pavel_l.

Recommended Posts

Andy Warhol used the image of Campbell's soup as a symbol of consumerism in '60s. The cell phone became such symbol in the 21st century. The "cell phone house" by analogy with "house of cards" symbolizes very unstable and dangerous "structure" (you can see as the cell phone house is leaning on the can to hold it in place) that, I consider, as more crucial because the "blind consumption" of the online information is shaping and is distorting our mind which is much more consequential than the accidental transient diarrhea.

 

Thank you for your thoughts.

 

cs2mffrm.thumb.jpg.ffd03032bd0df84d3bb07db74ef8a117.jpg

Edited by pavel_l.
  • Like 2

"... Our perception of the world is a fantasy that coincides with reality."

Chris Frith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange to me that it’s not in color. Color would read as more contemporary and, since it’s about contemporary culture, that would seem more expressive here. Color would also better reference Warhol, especially if a palette were chosen that added to the cultural comment you’re trying to make.

 

If you’re finding yourself explaining the symbolism you’ve created, think again about either that symbolism or the explanation. It’s like having to explain a joke. Something’s not working or you’re unsure if it is.

 

This is all very literal. “House of cards” translated into “house of phones.“ Feels a bit forced?

 

You’ve taken on two big cultural symbols that are unrelated and they feel a little artificial when tied together, which is likely why you felt the need to provide the explanation. I think there’s a lack of coherence between what the Campbell’s soup can says about consumerism and how the iPhone may establish a house of cards in terms of information technology and communication, each idea worth considering in their own right.

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the way that you've translated your idea into a 'visual concept' and set-up for this photo! In the photo itself, I really like the lighting and background textures. Even without the soup can, you've captured the instability theme ("house of cards") well.

 

Without your explanation, the 'visual message' that came across to me is: instability of communication and/or information-sharing via mobile phones, which are now popular cultural objects (via your reference to Warhol's painting of Campbells Soup Cans).

 

As far as I know, Warhol's pop-art paintings (including Campbells Soup Cans) were simply that: paintings of people and objects that were currently popular in the US culture of the time. According to Wikipedia: ''When the art critic G. R. Swenson asked Warhol in 1963 why he painted soup cans, the artist replied, 'I used to drink it, I used to have the same lunch every day, for twenty years' ". As far as I know Warhol made no artistic comment on ''consumerism' other than by celebrating the popular icons of US 'cultural development' of his time. As an artist, he drew on celebrities and objects that were 'popular' (or ordinary) in the US culture of his time.

 

So for me, the link between the one Soup Can and 'consumerism' is a bit tenuous. You might want to further to develop your visual concept further by experimenting (sketching). One alternative that springs to my mind is a ''Campbells Soup Cans" 2020 version in which (at least some of) the original 32 soup cans are replaced by digital phones showing social media images. There are of course many many more alternatives.

 

In summary, I think you did really well to get most of your "message" across in this very attractive photo. Maybe that was the main part of your message with 'consumerism' being implicit in the use of mobile phones. At least it was for me. I'm just giving you feedback that I connected the soup can with 'cultural icon' rather than with consumerism. I would also have preferred (perhaps in PP) to see the mobile phones switched on and displaying something rather than being 'dead' structural objects.

 

I'm a great fan of conceptual/narrative photography and this is a wonderful example!

 

Best wishes,

 

Mike

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange to me that it’s not in color. Color would read as more contemporary and, since it’s about contemporary culture, that would seem more expressive here. Color would also better reference Warhol, especially if a palette were chosen that added to the cultural comment you’re trying to make.

 

If you’re finding yourself explaining the symbolism you’ve created, think again about either that symbolism or the explanation. It’s like having to explain a joke. Something’s not working or you’re unsure if it is.

 

This is all very literal. “House of cards” translated into “house of phones.“ Feels a bit forced?

 

You’ve taken on two big cultural symbols that are unrelated and they feel a little artificial when tied together, which is likely why you felt the need to provide the explanation. I think there’s a lack of coherence between what the Campbell’s soup can says about consumerism and how the iPhone may establish a house of cards in terms of information technology and communication, each idea worth considering in their own right.

 

Thank you sam.

I usually don't use narrative when I post my photos in Critique forum until I hear viewers responses,

I agree that color will make my photo more pleased to eyes, the problem is I did not try to duplicate the Warhol's painting.

"... Our perception of the world is a fantasy that coincides with reality."

Chris Frith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that color will make my photo more pleased to eyes, the problem is I did not try to duplicate the Warhol's painting.

Just to be clear. I didn't suggest color because I thought it would be more pleasing to the eye. Please re-read why I thought color would work. I also did not suggest you duplicate Warhol's painting. I talked about referencing it, not duplicating it. Communication can be SO frustrating.

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange to me that it’s not in color. Color would read as more contemporary and, since it’s about contemporary culture, that would seem more expressive here. Color would also better reference Warhol, especially if a palette were chosen that added to the cultural comment you’re trying to make.

 

If you’re finding yourself explaining the symbolism you’ve created, think again about either that symbolism or the explanation. It’s like having to explain a joke. Something’s not working or you’re unsure if it is.

 

This is all very literal. “House of cards” translated into “house of phones.“ Feels a bit forced?

 

You’ve taken on two big cultural symbols that are unrelated and they feel a little artificial when tied together, which is likely why you felt the need to provide the explanation. I think there’s a lack of coherence between what the Campbell’s soup can says about consumerism and how the iPhone may establish a house of cards in terms of information technology and communication, each idea worth considering in their own right.

 

Thank you sam.

I usually don't use narrative when I post my photos in Critique forum until I hear viewers responses, not sure what make me think that I should change my habit. Perhaps my narrative has turned perception of this photo in to too trivial process.

 

I agree that color will make my photo more pleased to eyes, the problem is I did not try to duplicate the Warhol's painting, the can was the starting point of conversation - no more no less.

 

I do not see too much "literallity" by drawing the lines between "two houses" - what more convoluted symbol would you choose?

 

I see the using of commonly offered food and accessing readily available online information are two layers of consumption are perfectly symbolic - "parallel" not identical. And as I mentioned in my annotation "... "house of phones" ... symbolizes very unstable and dangerous "structure" ... that, I consider, as more crucial because the "blind consumption" of the online information is shaping and is distorting our mind which is much more consequential ..."

Cheers.

"... Our perception of the world is a fantasy that coincides with reality."

Chris Frith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the way that you've translated your idea into a 'visual concept' and set-up for this photo! In the photo itself, I really like the lighting and background textures. Even without the soup can, you've captured the instability theme ("house of cards") well.

 

Without your explanation, the 'visual message' that came across to me is: instability of communication and/or information-sharing via mobile phones, which are now popular cultural objects (via your reference to Warhol's painting of Campbells Soup Cans).

 

As far as I know, Warhol's pop-art paintings (including Campbells Soup Cans) were simply that: paintings of people and objects that were currently popular in the US culture of the time. According to Wikipedia: ''When the art critic G. R. Swenson asked Warhol in 1963 why he painted soup cans, the artist replied, 'I used to drink it, I used to have the same lunch every day, for twenty years' ". As far as I know Warhol made no artistic comment on ''consumerism' other than by celebrating the popular icons of US 'cultural development' of his time. As an artist, he drew on celebrities and objects that were 'popular' (or ordinary) in the US culture of his time.

 

So for me, the link between the one Soup Can and 'consumerism' is a bit tenuous. You might want to further to develop your visual concept further by experimenting (sketching). One alternative that springs to my mind is a ''Campbells Soup Cans" 2020 version in which (at least some of) the original 32 soup cans are replaced by digital phones showing social media images. There are of course many many more alternatives.

 

In summary, I think you did really well to get most of your "message" across in this very attractive photo. Maybe that was the main part of your message with 'consumerism' being implicit in the use of mobile phones. At least it was for me. I'm just giving you feedback that I connected the soup can with 'cultural icon' rather than with consumerism. I would also have preferred (perhaps in PP) to see the mobile phones switched on and displaying something rather than being 'dead' structural objects.

 

I'm a great fan of conceptual/narrative photography and this is a wonderful example!

 

Best wishes,

 

Mike

 

Thank you Mike.

My message is not about instability of channels of communication, it's about making decision based on possible inaccurate/distorted information that was consumed with help of the cell phones.

 

Cheers.

  • Like 1

"... Our perception of the world is a fantasy that coincides with reality."

Chris Frith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear. I didn't suggest color because I thought it would be more pleasing to the eye. Please re-read why I thought color would work. I also did not suggest you duplicate Warhol's painting. I talked about referencing it, not duplicating it. Communication can be SO frustrating.

 

Yes, I agree that duplicating was not good choice.

 

Considering the skim palette of objects around the can the color may turn this can in to the central object of composition that was not my intention. I'm going to try to shoot this in color.

"... Our perception of the world is a fantasy that coincides with reality."

Chris Frith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’ve taken on two big cultural symbols that are unrelated and they feel a little artificial when tied together, which is likely why you felt the need to provide the explanation. I think there’s a lack of coherence between what the Campbell’s soup can says about consumerism and how the iPhone may establish a house of cards in terms of information technology and communication, each idea worth considering in their own right.

 

consider presentation,

As Warhol did with the soup cans he used polymer paint devoid of background , more consideration to the presentation would enhance The message. For example I think having this photographed on a pedestal presented as a plastic sculpture would help. As is it seems a rough sketch, incomplete.

 

"I'm going to try to shoot this in color." :)

"...switched on and displaying something rather than being 'dead' structural objects" :)

Edited by inoneeye

n e y e

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this although I think maybe it feels a bit flat (strictly visually) shot from almost straight on. I also agree that it would be more impactful in color and love Mike’s idea of having the phones lit with screens showing something on them, running videos, or whatever.

 

I like that you’ve thought enough to tie the soup can- definitely symbolic of the past but also in its day representative of a “new world order” in which mass produced food-stuffs became far more the norm than they had been previously, to mobile phones- once a “future” concept but now as (or more widely) ubiquitous as Campbell’s Soup once was. To my eye the message of consumerism is only vaguely represented here; what I get is something more deeply cultural that spans decades or ties together the 20th & 21st centuries. Although the “statement” seems somewhat amorphous, your intent comes though well enough.

 

The Warhol reference works more in the abstract than in the actual, I think. From what I’ve gathered over the years, having been to the Warhol museum and etc etc is that his vision for making art of iconic objects and people was this: he mass produced images of soup cans, pistols, people, etc- I always understood it, he brought mass produced “pop” art to the world to show the similarities between art and marketing and yes perhaps consumerism. His “art” (soup cans) had no deeper meaning, and in fact he had people working at silkscreening and mass producing his work. The point was that there was no point to a painting of a soup can- yet it was art nonetheless. In doing this he challenged the traditional schools of thought that art had to have some meaning.

 

Seems your tying a soup can to mobile phones and consumerism, in this light, is adept if not abstract. The average person would of course recognize that Mr Warhol produced images of ordinary items but possibly wouldn’t know the full back story. Yet knowledge of that, or the lack thereof, wouldn’t impede one from getting the feel of this shot.

 

In terms of simply looking at this and seeing it as pure imagery or shape, it’s not displeasing. Your “story” and title lead me in a direction I might otherwise not have gone but in the end provide the basis for this critique. You’ve put some imagination and effort into creating this and I say bravo.

 

By the way, I’ve viewed your photo and written this on my phone! I do occasionally eat canned soup although I’m partial to Progesso’s “Spilt Pea With Ham”.

Edited by Ricochetrider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

consider presentation,

As Warhol did with the soup cans he used polymer paint devoid of background , more consideration to the presentation would enhance The message. For example I think having this photographed on a pedestal presented as a plastic sculpture would help. As is it seems a rough sketch, incomplete.

 

"I'm going to try to shoot this in color." :)

"...switched on and displaying something rather than being 'dead' structural objects" :)

 

 

Thank you inoneeye.

 

Yes, make this as 3D installation on pedestal and cycle some video will bear much more weight and will represent another genre of the art.

 

Cheers.

"... Our perception of the world is a fantasy that coincides with reality."

Chris Frith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this although I think maybe it feels a bit flat (strictly visually) shot from almost straight on. I also agree that it would be more impactful in color and love Mike’s idea of having the phones lit with screens showing something on them, running videos, or whatever.

 

I like that you’ve thought enough to tie the soup can- definitely symbolic of the past but also in its day representative of a “new world order” in which mass produced food-stuffs became far more the norm than they had been previously, to mobile phones- once a “future” concept but now as (or more widely) ubiquitous as Campbell’s Soup once was. To my eye the message of consumerism is only vaguely represented here; what I get is something more deeply cultural that spans decades or ties together the 20th & 21st centuries. Although the “statement” seems somewhat amorphous, your intent comes though well enough.

 

The Warhol reference works more in the abstract than in the actual, I think. From what I’ve gathered over the years, having been to the Warhol museum and etc etc is that his vision for making art of iconic objects and people was this: he mass produced images of soup cans, pistols, people, etc- I always understood it, he brought mass produced “pop” art to the world to show the similarities between art and marketing and yes perhaps consumerism. His “art” (soup cans) had no deeper meaning, and in fact he had people working at silkscreening and mass producing his work. The point was that there was no point to a painting of a soup can- yet it was art nonetheless. In doing this he challenged the traditional schools of thought that art had to have some meaning.

 

Seems your tying a soup can to mobile phones and consumerism, in this light, is adept if not abstract. The average person would of course recognize that Mr Warhol produced images of ordinary items but possibly wouldn’t know the full back story. Yet knowledge of that, or the lack thereof, wouldn’t impede one from getting the feel of this shot.

 

In terms of simply looking at this and seeing it as pure imagery or shape, it’s not displeasing. Your “story” and title lead me in a direction I might otherwise not have gone but in the end provide the basis for this critique. You’ve put some imagination and effort into creating this and I say bravo.

 

By the way, I’ve viewed your photo and written this on my phone! I do occasionally eat canned soup although I’m partial to Progesso’s “Spilt Pea With Ham”.

 

 

Thank you Ricochetrider for your feedback.

 

I understand that mentioning such name as Warhol along with image of canned soup does immediately assign significant portion of meaning of my photo to the Warhol's interpretation of his painting, but that was not my intention. I'm talking about abstract idea - significance of the consumed information. The can is the entry point in pair with the cell phones structure are leading lines to the meaning of my photo. I did not try to convey Warhol's idea of HIS cans. I used the can as one of the of the possible object that may be of synonym of consumerism.

 

Cheers.

  • Like 1

"... Our perception of the world is a fantasy that coincides with reality."

Chris Frith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talking about it or not, I don’t know that it’s possible to use a Campbell’s Soup can so prominently in a photo without a viewer associating it with the visual of Warhol’s soup can and its references. Something about symbols is the power with which they can be used but also the lack of control you often have over them, which is why they are symbols.
  • Like 2

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, make this as 3D installation on pedestal and cycle some video will bear much more weight and will represent another genre of the art.

I wasn't suggesting an installation, video, or another medium. I was distracted away from the intended message by this particular presentation. The pedastal was one simple example of how we elevate our products. It also would tune me in to what it means for you... an important message, observation making me more inquisitive. The background and lighting do not punctuate or enhance your message for me they lead me elsewhere.

Of course you would not do as I might. That would not be interesting or my point. It may be a finished image or maybe it is a work in progress...?

Just some thoughts....

Edited by inoneeye

n e y e

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...