Advertising Art embodies prosperity. It is therefore ideally suited to ensnaring consumers.
Bettina Richter has selected art quotes from the poster collection of the Museum für Gestaltung Zürich for an exhibition at the Swiss National Bank. She spoke to Werbewoche about the déjà vu effect of such advertising motifs.
WW Warhol's motifs as window decorations for a fashion chain or his style for car advertising - art quotations are always booming in advertising. As an art historian, when does it make sense for you to borrow from art, and when does it come across as pandering?
Bettina Richter Advertising has to be a bit ingratiating; after all, it has to entice and confirm consumers. Art quotations in advertising are hardly based on hobby, but solely on the commercial interest of the client. In my opinion, an art quote is successful if it is multi-layered and works with embedded memories of certain images and codes. If the quote is too superficial, it becomes flat and loses its impact.
Where can you draw the line to banality? This can only be judged by looking at the specific poster. Basically, it can be said that the more frequently images are used - statistically, the "Mona Lisa" and the "David" are among these - the greater the demands on the advertiser to make up for signs of wear and tear with an innovative idea.
Works of art that are part of the cultural public domain are highly recognizable and attract attention more quickly. If creative people do not help themselves with such
images to disguise their own lack of ideas?
Today, many advertisers operate skillfully with such worn-out images. They use the déjà vu effect, which only works if an image is stored deep in our subconscious, deliberately and purposefully. The viewer is most likely to notice a change in the familiar image.
Does it serve a work of art and its public recognition if it is frequently quoted? Whether art quotations in advertising serve or harm the work of art depends very much on each individual's concept of art. For some, dressing David in jeans is a sophisticated eye-catcher because his biblical role and thus values such as beauty and spiritual strength unconsciously resonate and radiate onto the jeans brand. For those who see art as something auratic, detached from everyday life, on the other hand, a David in jeans borders on blasphemy. Conversely, works of art in advertising would hardly stand out if they were not alienated, but simply quoted one-to-one.
Otto Kern advertised its jeans in a scandalous way in the 1990s. The poster restaged da Vinci's "Last Supper of Jesus" for marketing purposes, with Jesus dressed only in jeans and the twelve disciples replaced by women who also wore only jeans. Can it be said that advertising can also destroy art?
The disenchantment of works of art also depends very much on the recipient's concept of art and their idea of values and the world. Despite our expanded concept of art and the intertwining of high art and everyday culture, for the masses art still embodies the classic panel painting in the museum with its aura. It is understandable that the image of Leonardo da Vinci is distorted for such an audience by this use in advertising.
For other people, as well as for me personally, art in every era is a reflection of everyday life and is connected to life and therefore cannot be disenchanted by such an image. However, advertisers have to show a certain sensitivity when using symbol-laden works. This is a constant, difficult balancing act between attracting attention to a specific medium and targeted provocation that crosses boundaries. The question of consideration for certain religious, ethical or cultural sensitivities arose in a similar way with the famous Benetton posters.
Many contemporary artists have no reservations about advertising and commerce and even believe they can use this system to their own ends. How credible are they and their works with this "uncritical" attitude?
This is a complex question that cannot be answered in a generally valid way because so many aspects come together here. It is simply a fact that the boundaries between art and everyday culture have been blurred. On the one hand, this has very positive components. On the other hand, it also harbours great dangers, namely the diminishing stability of value and the commercialization and appropriation of even critical artists.
Don't brands that present themselves to a critical public with artistic advertising appearances also make themselves vulnerable?
If a quote is quoted - déjà vu effect - the only way to make yourself vulnerable is if, as mentioned, the quote is blasphemous or if the boundaries of morality are crossed. Sometimes, however, the client and the advertising agency also aim to provoke a scandal - but then there is often a hard-hitting commercial interest behind it ...
... which then quickly wears off again. Of course. Advertising and art are becoming more and more similar in their rapid shock effect and aggressive appearance, which often fade just as quickly.
Since the 1990s, contemporary art has been part of the corporate identity strategy of luxury goods companies in particular, according to the motto that the accumulation of cultural capital serves to consolidate the hierarchical position in the market. Doesn't this also lead to art inflation and wear and tear?
I am convinced of that. But it's a phenomenon of our time, a trend that can no longer be stopped. Many artists, without wanting to generalize, sell themselves like a branded product.
The traditional image of the artistic genius, working in seclusion in his studio, his name inscribed in posterity, is a thing of the past, but it is still a cliché that many still cling to. Art itself is becoming increasingly commercialized and treated like an advertising product. We live in a time of sensory overload - not just visual overload - and this inevitably leads to excessive demands and signs of wear and tear.
So if the déjà vu experience is reserved for classical works of art and modern art remains difficult to access, what chance do you give contemporary works of art of being quoted in advertising in the future? As a result, fewer specific names and images are anchored in the general consciousness. There may be a few exceptions, such as Georg Baselitz, for example, when everyone quickly thinks of head-over-heels pictures.
But then his work is limited to this phase alone, and everything he did afterwards is erased from the public consciousness. When advertising borrows from contemporary art, it is less about directly quoting individual works and more about adopting certain codes, visual languages and certain attitudes. However, this is happening faster and faster today - again a phenomenon of the blurring of boundaries between high art and everyday culture with all its complex positive and negative consequences.
Michael EngelmannIn a joint production with the Kunstbibliothek, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin and Lars Müller Publishers, the Museum für Gestaltung Zürich is dedicating the upcoming exhibition to the German graphic designer Michael Engelmann (1928 to 1966). With his unadorned photography, decisive use of color and laconic texts, he made a name for himself in the 1950s.
a dense sign language in matter-of-fact typography, which attempted to dispel the bland advertising from German advertising.
With his work for Roth-Händle, Pirellio and Renault, Engelmann became a trendsetter in the aesthetic reorientation between functionalism and pop. (la)
November 9, 2004 to February 25, 2005 in the poster room, Limmatstrasse 55, Tuesday to Friday, 1 to 5 pm.
Eye-catcher or blasphemy? Whether art classics such as "David" and "Mona Lisa" can be alienated as advertising subjects is controversial.
Van Gogh and Warhol: advertising with art subjects is a balancing act between attracting attention and provocation.
Typical Michael Engelmann.
Interview: Luca Aloisi