View this Free Essay in PDF format

This free essay has been submitted by: Guest User

APPROPRIATION/IMITATION

Andy Warhol copied a Brillo Box and made artistic history. Why is Andy's work art and not the Brillo Box cover?

According to aesthetic so far I have learned different definitions of art and the one that I believe in the most is: Art refers to a diverse range of human activities and artifacts, and may be used to cover all or any of the arts, including music, literature and other forms. It is most often used to refer specifically to the visual arts, including media such as painting, sculpture, and printmaking. However it can also be applied to forms of art that stimulate the other senses such as music. Since decades arguments and issues have been discussed about what does and does not count as art. A same question arises when we talk about James Harvey's Brillo Box copied by Andy Warhol and making it a historic work of art. That is what is going to be discussed and argued in this essay.

Andy Warhol was famous of making pop art out of commercial designs, and she made a historic work of art by making a replica of the Brillo Box with wood rather than card board. In 1960's Andy copied the Brillo Box and made history. Now the question is how and why her box is considered art and not Harvey's. the major difference between the two was materials, Andy's box was made of acrylic and silkscreen on wood, on the other hand Harvey's box was made of card board. Andy's work was categorized as sculpture and Harvey's a box for products and these differences made such a huge impact on people reaction. Since sculptures are three dimensional artwork created by shaping hard or plastic material, commonly stone (rock or marble), metal, or wood. Form one of the essays from the book I figured that because a sculpture involves the use of materials that can be moulded or modulated, it is considered one of the plastic arts. And I think why Andy's Brillo box was considered art was because it was in the category of plastic art. And Harvey's brillo was just a box used to attract consumers toward the products.

What I believe is that Andy's brillo box was not much of an art piece; it was just the spirit of the time. People at in the 60's were really into a reproduction of pieces of art. Andy's brillo box is quite substantially revised from its original appearance and it developed a huge reaction by the audience of the time which leads the box to be a reactionary art. The box is considered art just because of the maker and the fame of the maker. Warhol being a pop artist was the zeitgeist if the time and he became famous by capturing the clean-edged look of commercially manufactured objects. And Brillo was one of them and became a work of art. I believe this box was considered art also because it was a constant process of action and reaction; leaving people with open borders between production, product, and reproduction.

Moreover, the production of these kinds of products was new and creative back then and Andy received a huge reaction by the audience and that attention made the Brillo Box a huge piece of art. But that all is how people believed in the 60's but what I see this issue is how these days we have counterfeit and knock off merchandise. These knock off are being mass produced and are selling more than the real pieces. But we do consider the real one the original pieces of art and the fakes fake. Taking this knock off situation into consideration I don't understand how Andy's Brillo Box got famous, sold with higher price and considered a work of art. It was basically a replica of another box and wasn't creative at all.

Add a Review for this free essay

Name: Rate: Select 10 (Good) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 (Bad)

Comments Characters Left
Verify:*

Sticky Note Text....