I was sitting in traffic the other day and saw a car called a SONATA and I wondered just what a piece of music has to do with a Korean automobile unless the horn plays the "Moonlight Sonata" or something. Then again, if Mozart can be used to sell chocolates, why can’t Beethoven be used as a front for cars? Or his own brand of chocolates for that matter. Or maybe Tosca, La Boheme, or Cosi Fan Tutti candy bars? Painting hasn't faired much better. Why can't advertisers leave the poor Mona Lisa alone? The woman who famously doesn't show her teeth has been reduced to lending her name to a bunch of dentists with the tag line "Dentistry is a work of art. Timeless beauty." No one has been more mined than Shakespeare to make a buck. The Folger Shakespeare Library has a great gallery showing the use (or misuse) of the Bard. While using Falsaff for brussel sprouts seems absurd, using the same character's name for beer is more insidious. Sure Falstaff was a good time guy in Prince Hal's youth, but King Henry rejected his old drinking buddy in later life, partially because of his drinking. Romeo and Juliet may be a Valentine's Day staple but I have a bit of trouble with them being associated with wine--doesn't anyone remember that Romeo died by drinking poison? And let's not even consider what the star-crossed lovers have to do with laser hair removal. Othello--a wife murderer--shares his name with a popular board game. In final Jeopardy, if the answer is "Othello" which question is more likely to be given: "What is a Mattel board game" or "Who is the Moor of Venice"? Using all of above for the names of products makes economic sense: the composers/artists/writers are long dead and so there are no copyright fees, etc. to deal with. As an example of more recent artist, Hemingway's family licensed his name to a line of furniture after Papa blew his head off.
All of the above might seem to be a bit absurd but you can see how it builds. So where is the harm? To be clear, I am not talking about parody, which I believe is a valid art form. The situation is pervasive. What is happening is that advertisers are plundering our cultural capital for profit. In doing so, they separate the original work from its greatness and make it a joke. Why study Romeo & Juliet if that is where you go to get your legs waxed? Eventually, it is possible that the play will be forgotten and the only thing that will be remembered is that those two crazy kids, Romeo and Juliet (along with Beethoven and Mozart) sure do make a great box of chocolates.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I find this topic quite intriguing as many advertising firms are using figures from the arts and humanities as marketing schemes just to get the consumer's attention. However, I doubt that this will change the value or credibility of these famous artists and writers. Despite mainstream's attempt to use "cultural capital for profit" it all boils down to those who know and understand the meaning behind the use of these highly esteemed names for monetary gain, also understand that this like other things will not stop anyone from reading their literature, analyzing and admiring their music or paintings. As time passes, these works will still remain important in the world of arts and humanities if nothing else.
This is a very interesting topic in the sense that it relates to the usefulness of the humanities. This makes the assumption that people are no longer fascinated by art. People do not see art and find an inspiration for living. Moreover, they now see the Mona Lisa and see dollar signs. We do not care about how the art makes us feel, only about how that art can produce capital. Years ago art and knowledge made the world go round; now without money we all lead lives that are not worth living...
Just because a car is named "Sonata" does not necessarily mean that I or the majority of people in world think of Beethoven. Sonata is simply a term describing a certain style of music and I feel it is acceptable for a car company to use that name for a particular type of car.
I do agree, however, that it is fascinating that certain names are being used and you did a great job of pointing out particular cases where this takes place.
Very interesting post! I am thrilled to see that someone else found the "Hemingway furniture" line as repulsive as I did. I suppose the marketing scheme was to sell and romanticize the Hemingway ethos, but that only works if you haven’t read Hemingway or don’t know anything about his life. The Hemingway hero, with his solitary “suck it up” approach to life, would NEVER have given much thought to furniture.
What I do see, however, is the allusive nature of these ad campaigns. One would have to know something about Hemingway in order to "get" the point of these chairs, tables, beds, etc. If I recall, the look of this furniture played upon Hemingway's experiences in Africa. Are the advertisers telling us that Hemingway’s Africa stories (“The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber” are his most recognizable works? Or have they abandoned the literary connection altogether and decided that Hemingway is only famous for shooting big game on an African safari?
There are many ways in which popular culture co-ops the creative work of writers, musicians, and artists, but the Hemingway furniture line was one of the worst I’ve ever seen.
Post a Comment