“The situation into which the product of mechanical reproduction can be brought may not touch the actual work of art, yet the quality of its presence is always depreciated.” (Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” Section II)
The Mona Lisa (Leonardo Da Vinci, circa 1503) (and its circulation in popular culture) is illustrative of Benjamin’s argument regarding the status of the artwork in the age of technical reproduction. I’ve posted an image of the original painting along with one of its more recent cultural manifestations.* Describe one way the meanings associated with the original painting effect the product being sold. Provide one example of how the ad’s use of digital technology changes the meaning of the original (for instance, in this ad, how do we interpret her famous smile?) Comparing this advertisement to the Mona Lisas made by modern artists of the Dada and Surrealist movements (Below: Marcel Duchamp, L.H.O.O.Q., 1919. S&C: 129; also Benjamin, Section XIV), what does the ad suggest about our society’s ideas and beliefs about beauty?
*The text at the bottom of the ad reads, “Pantene Time Renewal. Restores age-damaged hair.”
18 comments:
The original meaning behind the Mona Lisa painting was supposed to represent what Leonardo Da Vinci believed was true beauty. So, in essence, the ad is trying to say that true beauty comes from using the hair restoration product being sold (though, ironically, one is not entirely being truthful when using a hair restoration product).
Now, through the blessing/curse that is Photoshop, Mona Lisa's famous smile now comes from how happy she is with using the product.
The Dada and Surrealist movements show Mona Lisa with a drawn-on goatee. What Marcel Duchamp was probably trying to get across was that true beauty is simply being true. If a woman should have a mustache, then she shouldn't hide it. However, through our culture's warped beliefs of beauty, they say that the only way to be happy and to convey your inner beauty is to be fake.
I was reminded of the Rocky Horror Playtime vs. Shopping Mall Home reading. The reading essentially mocked how everything in our culture revolved around buying the newest and greatest thing. Though cynical, Jonathan Rosenbaum's idea of today's consumerism seems to be right on the dot.
The Mona Lisa, by Leonardo Da Vinci, has been around this earth attracting attention and praise for the past 500 years. The original painting, that which is now a dull and somewhat dreary fading piece of work, displays that smile in an almost eerie way. For so long has this “smile” puzzled men and women, who respond to it, in the way I usually have, with “What the hell is she happy about?” Well, I suppose “content” is a more appropriate match. But anyway, everything about that original painting that paints us with curious wonder, has been given a new meaning in that hair renewal reproduction. This, of course, is the whole point of that advertisement. What was once an aging, crackling portrait, is now a much more colorful, and bright, restored art piece. Mona Lisa now seems to be smiling because of her pasted on, renewed hair and glowing complexion. However, Marcel Duchamp’s modern reproduction of the painting seems to be indicating that Mona Lisa, a woman perceived with a simple and natural beauty to some, can be also viewed as nothing but a plain looking woman who can indeed be easily mistaken for a young man. Although Duchamp seems to make a point through his colorful chunk of work, the eeriness of that ominous smile seems to shine through that gorgeous mustache.
We live in a society that seems to see beauty as what something or someone Can be, not for who or what they really are.
When a company develops an advertisement they regress to please the most basic hedonistic human impulses, i.e. if you use our product you will be happy.
Pantene will really "Give you something to smile about".
This add takes the genuine happiness of Mona Lisa(the true aesthetic value of the original painting) and warps it. It's now not who she is that makes her happy but the product.
The original meaning now works to uphold the power of the product.
The add is a perfect reflection of our consumerist society in that it shows our constant drive to "better" ourselves.
But how can you improve upon perfection? I would be hard pressed to find a person who believes that the Mona Lisa is in someway a flawed piece of work, or that the smile indicates anything other than her own contentness. The ad argues otherwise: You can ALWAYS be more beautiful. You can ALWAYS do something about that dull hair. The ad tells me that being content isn't okay.
Andrew Tolstedt
The Mona Lisa is one of the most recognizable works in European art and carries the concept of cultured high society like many other famous works of art do. The original painting also represented what people in Western culture considered the ideal for beauty 500 years ago. Naturally, Pantene tried to attach the image of beauty to the product being sold by using a familiar image that would most likely catch the eye of the viewer. It can make the consumer believe that by using this one product, they can become truly beautiful. Also, like Sturken and Cartwright said in Practices of Looking, the use of a classic piece of art in advertising can add the appeal of sophistication to the product and win over more consumers.
The ad changed what was just a simple smile in the original to a look of contentment at having a frizz-free hairdo.
Duchamp’s Mona Lisas pokes fun at and challenges society’s views of beauty by making an icon of femininity look masculine. It probably means that anything can be considered beautiful and it should be up to the individual, not society, to determine what is beautiful or not. The ad suggests that beauty has to be bought. Only that one style is beautiful and anything that’s natural about you needs to be changed because it’ll never be adequate.
There are considerable differences between the two images of the Mona Lisa painting by Leonardo Da Vinci. One of the images is a digital copy of the original painting by Da Vinci. The other image has been misconstrued in order to be associated with an ad campaign for a hair product. There are certain elements of the painting that are changed in order to connect with the product. The most striking change of the original painting is the hair of Mona Lisa herself. The company physically changes the hair in order to make their hair product seem effective. The message of this change for the consumer is; if it works for Mona Lisa, it must work for me. The company changes the original work of Da Vinci in order to connect with the consumer by using a famous painting that everyone knows. Besides physically altering the painting, the company behind this ad also uses the original painting details to promote their product. Mona Lisa’s mysterious smile is now used to show her content for the product she has used. Previously, people had been fascinated by the unknown reasons for her smile and now through this ad, there is a reason provided for it. Walter Benjamin says that, “Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be,” (Benjamin 733). By taking a digital copy and altering the image of Mona Lisa it takes on new meaning, and is no longer connected with the original painting by Da Vinci.
This ad reflects upon society in that it promotes extreme vanity by proposing that even the Mona Lisa can be improved upon.
The Mona Lisa was originally seen as a work of art and beauty because it was a beautiful women seen through the eyes of Da Vinci. Several things that were thought to be beautiful about her is one her mouth which could be interpreted as a smile or not a smile. The ad uses this feature to sell their hair product by making it seem like she is smiling because of how her hair looks. The people who made this ad also made Mona more tan and the colors around her more vibrant. This leads to the change on how the image is interpreted from what Da Vinci thought was beauty to she is smiling because she looks good with her hair and so can you if you buy this product. This ad also shows our society's view of beauty. It takes something that was thought to be beautiful and has for hundreds of years and says that it looks better if her hair was this way and yours will too, defeating the whole purpose of the original piece. In my opinion, yes it is a smart way to sell your product, but I have to agree with Walter Benjamin when he says the work is being "depreciated" by doing this sort of thing to it.
-Matthew Curley
Kevin Witkowski Sec. #- 33072
The Mona Lisa has different meanings and representations to many people, but after looking online for about an hour, it seems that most people believe that the portrait represents happiness. The hardest piece of evidence for this is of course her smile. What most people disagree with is the fact of why she is happy. This ad tries to explain the mystery of her happiness by saying that it’s the shampoo that makes her happy. The paintings meaning and the ads interpretation of that meaning positively affects the ads effectiveness in society these days. Many people in today’s society believe they need to be beautiful to be happy and this ad shows a shampoo giving someone beautiful hair which we think makes them happy.
This ad uses digital technology to change the hair from straight and “plain” to curly, shiny, and “beautiful”. And of course since this ad is selling shampoo, we are supposed to believe that it is the shampoo that transformed her hair into the way it is in the ad. Because of the change from plain to beautiful hair, many people interpret that the reason the Mona Lisa is smiling is because of her new, beautiful hair and that the shampoo made it that way.
This ad represents today’s society’s belief that beauty brings happiness. We are thought to believe that the woman in the ad is happy because she is beautiful. Marcel Duchamp’s L.H.O.O.Q. (1919) offers a different message. He depicts the same exact image that Da Vinci painted, but with one difference, a mustache and goatee painted on the face of the woman. In nearly any time period, this would be considered weird and ugly, yet the woman is still smiling and is still happy. One interpretation of this could be that happiness is not based on how you look on the outside, but instead based on something other than looks. Beauty has taken a front seat in today’s society and has become the number one priority of many people. This ad confirms this by having the message that a product can make you beautiful and that beauty can make you happy( at least in today’s society).
Kevin Witkowski Sec. #- 33072
The Mona Lisa by Leonardo Da Vinci is representing beauty; natural beauty. But in the modern and digitally edited version the beauty is portrayed as if It just comes in a bottle. So the advertising agents are inferring that she is really smiling because she is beautiful because of the product, and that the only way for someone to look beautiful like the Mona Lisa is to use this product. So buy it! Which totally reflects the article by Rosenbaum about how we are a society built around total consumption of media, which makes us 'good' consumers.
The other painting done during the Surrealist and Dada movement is definitley not an advertisment, but more of a statement of their type of arts movement towards putting odd things together artistically (which is arguable) and in this case it is taking a classic and highly recognizable work of art and adding a humorous twist to catch the eye. But also to make someone think. Is the Mona Lisa still beautiful, even with a mustache? Most people would say the Mona Lisa her self is still attractive because it is so well painted. So it actually aids the classic art proving once again it is a perfect rendition of natural beauty that even a mustache can't hide.
The product, obviously a hair product, is using an example of what most people would consider is true Beauy: Da Vinci's Mona Lisa. The image is simple and is extremely well known for most of us were infants when we first saw the image of the Mona Lisa. Then what did they do? They gave her flat straight lock of hair and gave her a touch up with their fine product.
Now I don't know the story behind the Mona Lisa, I think she was just posing for Da Vinci, so I'm assuming he told her to smile. What she's smiling about I have no idea, but this ad is telling us that the product they sell is the true essence to Lisa's smile.
This is how advertisment works and strangely I enjoy the references that some places make. Rip-off? Naw, I find it purly innocent. It happens all the time and it is not stopping so why fight it.
As for the drawn out Goatee, I think it's just a statement that says no matter who you are, smile. If your a woman with a goatee, hairy legs and greasy hair. Be proud of who you are and not what people want you to be. Being happy means you're happy with yourself.
The original Mona. Lisa presents the value of Renaissance. The aesthesis of Renaissance painting comes from the precise mimesis of pictorial landscape and portrait as James Monaco summarizes in his article Film, Photography and Painting, and Mona Lisa with the perfect illustration of these two characteristics, is the icon of classic renaissance and thus built up the interpretation of classic beauty. For Pantene, a company that sells products to assist the acknowledgement of beauty in today’s society, the painting of Mona. Lisa serves as a reference. Thus, the meaning of transformation presented in the ad comes in two aspects: the restoration of the perfectness and the renewal version of the classic beauty. The change for viewers’ interpretation to the classic painting is no longer a rare facial expression but a modern commercial cliché.
Duchamp’s LHOOQ stands for the contradictory interpretation about classic beauty from the Pantene advertisement. He questions about the meaning of an artwork and mocks the aesthetic standard. With the comparison of LHOOQ, it is more obvious that the ad suggests one certain standard/mode of defining beauty in today’s society.
By using this painting in a hair advertisment, the promotion can be extremely successful due to the easily recognized painting of the Mona Lisa. The painting is extremely well known to nearly all people regardless of an interest in art due to the smile and the plain beauty Da Vinci captured. A hair product works well with the natural beauty of the painting getting across the same message that the product can do for the average person. The digital technogoly also creates a positive message used in favor of the hair product company. The hair placed digitally on the painting can display the message that the old fashion beauty of the plain, simple women can be provided by a new hair product of our time. While it seems that the product is benefiting from the painting, the painting gains new meaning through the technology. It is almost made timeless, through the regeneration of making the image sharper, and more clear, the painting can never die to people, and will never be forgotten.
Our society has been influenced into thinking that beauty only on the outside, which is not only being shown through this ad, but celebrity life, and our never ending belief that we have to be picture perfect. The ad shows that with age one loses beauty, which looks away from ones inner beauty. Society has conformed to believe that one must look beautiful all the time, and feeling beautiful can only be reached through visual appearance, taking away from the plain, simple beauty one can see in the slight smile of the Mona Lisa.
Matthew Prekop
I feel that the true meaning of the Mona Lisa is to capture what lies beneath. In other words, her emotions, thoughts, feelings are her inner beauty. Inner beauty, I feel, is you just being you and not pretending to be something you’re not.
Now through the hair care product, they are trying to show that the product will enhance your inner beauty.
In the ad we now think that she is smiling because of what the hair care product did for her. Not because she is generally happy.
I feel that one negative effect this ad campaign might have, is the fact that they took away the mystery of why Mona Lisa was smiling. This has been a great wonder of our society for years and the photo shop just demolished it.
I think that the Dada and Surrealist movements painting of Mona Lisa was done well. They seem to be underling the main idea of the original Mona Lisa, show your inner beauty. And what better way to show this than by making Mona Lisa seem like a plain "Jane" or with the mustache an average "Joe".
The painting of the Mona Lisa has always had mysterious connotations deeply rooted in the concept of beauty. Suggestions have flown around for centuries as to what inspired Da Vinci to paint such a foreign--even for that time--representation of perfection. However, the fact remains, the Mona Lisa always has, and most likely always will carry the symbolism of true beauty. This being true, the reasons for using such a symbol to advertise a product designed to fabricate our regional illusion of beauty are obvious. To a person of the 21st century, the Mona Lisa represents enigmatic but elegant, historic beauty. That concept, thus modernized through commercialism, presents undeniable appeal. In this fluid society of subtle games, it is often the silent force of progress pushing off of history which is the stronger. In the case of the Pantene advertisement, this is just one small step in a history of depreciation. It is often the tragedy of high art, with recognition comes the motive for reproduction beyond recognition. The Mona Lisa has once more used against her smug will to endorse a message beyond her place in time and authenticity. An interesting note; Sturken and Cartwright mention the concept of a “myth” as outlined by Barthes. A “myth”, as a cultural connotation that lends itself to the belief of being universal, is exactly why this advertising can succeed. It is only because we believe our cultural idea of beauty to be global, that we as a society can bear to see a beauty so classic brought into question for a matter so trivial. In regard to the Duchamp work, by even comparing it with the original we are falling right into the Dadaist trap of reaction at any cost. The ideas of beauty were never meant to be challenged by that painting, it was only a tool for the means of shocking and inspiring an art community on the brink of a new medium, as discussed in the article by Walter Benjamin.
People tend to view the Mona Lisa as very solemn, so the contrast of the advertisement is accentuated. In the modern portrayal, the entire meaning of the piece is altered. It is suddenly somehow encouraging satisfaction in living up to the standards of others within society.
This ad shows how our society places a huge importance on physical appearance. By using such a well known piece of art, it is easy to guarantee a huge range of consumer recognition. The advertisement utilizes the fact that the painting is a classic work, and induces a dose of pop-culture to appeal to the current generation. Our society has learned to take everything to the next level-especially appearance. We have come to think that looking a certain way will bring happiness, which could be interpreted through Mona Lisa’s smile.
The use of technology emphasizes that the meaning of the art is intended to be changed, and the fact that it’s so obviously digitally re-vamped is almost sickening.
-Heidi Sherwood
Olivia Gomez-
When Da Vinci originally painted the Mona Lisa, she was considered a standard of beauty for the time. This may encourage consumers to purchase products that have the work on them because it allows them to compare themselves to a classic beauty.
When the piece suffers the effects of our digital age, the meaning is greatly altered. The original painting gives off a feeling of mysterious serenity, whereas the altered version makes it seem as though the woman is merely self-content due to the fact that her hair looks good.
Though the Mona Lisa is still considered beautiful, the advertisement only strengthens the idea that a person's natural state is no longer good enough.
The Dadaist's and Surrealist's interpretations of the piece mock the original. This transfers to a possible mockery of the standards of Da Vinci's time as well. It's almost as if they are saying that the woman might as well have a mustache, be it because of impossible standards set by these idealist beauties or the fact that the woman herself may no longer be considered beautiful for her lack of the current day's "grooming".
Mona Lisa's smile is a representation of how "true" beauty was to be represented during that specific time period. Throughout history ideas of beauty and what a woman should look like have changed. Clothing styles and "fads" seem to come and go much more frequently in tour present world. Sure Mona Lisa is the essence of beauty... but only in this time period.
Ideas of beauty change throughout history. Most of the time however we can say that these woman that were once the essence of beauty are still beautiful but no longer that true beauty we all aspire to see and be.
Because of all the advertisements and new form of art and trying to get products sold, Advertisment companies take once "the essence of beauty and transform it into what we now consider beauty. Hair volume. By giving Mona Lisa volume to her hair they say that even this picture of beauty is transforming herself to fit today's customs. This however is not something that should be taken lightly. They have taken a piece of art and transformed into an ad that defaces the true meaning of the original art. Sure it is light-hearted and funny and gets the point across however completely takes away from the true meaning of the picture.
The Original painting represents what the average women would look like in the 1500's. Sort of like an image of modest sexy and her smile I believe is sort of a tease, which makes it a little mysterious and Leonardo might have been the only person who knew what she was smiling for. And the rest of the world has to try and figure it out. The Pantene ad is suggesting that the modest sexy of this generation has shiny, voluminous, hair which might be an explanation as to why she's smiling. The difference between the two is that the digital reproduction brings a bit of comedy to the painting; and the original would usually be approached more seriously. Both of the digitally reproduced paintings are comical however the in the Pantene ad her smile is more evident or at least appear that way with her new hair which is apart of our image of beauty. The Dada and Surrealist movement reproduction is more like beauty is skin deep, kind of the opposite of the Pantene ad.
The way in which the original art is affecting the product being sold is that it elevates the product's status or value by associating it ironically with something priceless. This changes the original art's meaning. An example of this can be shown through the use of digital photo editting to change the hair of the original art to make it more appealing, as well as adding text. Comparing this modern art to the original it clearly detriments the original's aura. I think the point attempting to be made by the other artist's is that Leonardo Da Vinci was not only a expert painter but also a joker. In fact there is a theory that Da Vinci was in fact painting a self portrait when he created the Mona Lisa, merely changing his own gender to hide this fact. He would have also liked the idea that people would come to worship his own image. There is another such theory about the Shroud of Turin.
This pantene ad suggests that society's idea of beauty is one of restored and perfect hair. This is the idea behind advertising is simple. Create an informational situation in which the consumer is left with the idea that the product advertised will leave them happier than they were before.
Post a Comment