Palin's 15 minutes of fame is over. She is the quintessential Warwhorelian

[Knutey]

Lipstick Jungle

Diary of a Mad Law Professor

by PATRICIA J. WILLIAMS

This article appeared in the October 6, 2008 edition of The Nation.
September 17, 2008

Andy Warhol would have loved Sarah Palin. She really is the ultimate soup can. For anyone who never quite understood the point of an art form in which the iconicity of a mass-produced object becomes an end above and beyond its contents--well, welcome to the fame factory.

Warhol is known for having minimized or even disguised his expressive role in the works he produced; yet he re-presented banal commercial images in ways that were playful and captivating despite their erstwhile familiarity. His explorations with the "kitschy," the "cheap" and the "ordinary" involved small cognitive surprises that were at once obvious and subtle: he'd disclose a pattern of layered color or he'd shift scale in a way that upended conventional meaning or he'd reiterate an image so emphatically that "mass" production was revealed as obsessive. What Warhol did with Mao Zedong and Marilyn Monroe is precisely what the Republican Party has done with Sarah Palin.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081006/williams/print

[Plane]

I would not have thought the RNC to be that into art.

[Knutey]

I would not have thought the RNC to be that into art.

No Repub is which is probly why you dont get it.

[BT]

Warhol has it pretty much right.

Both parties market their brand same as Coke and Pepsi market theirs.

Warhol understood he was a brand also, just as Knute, Brass, XO, Tee and Plane and every other regular in here is a brand.

[Brassmask]

Warhol understood he was a brand also, just as Knute, Brass, XO, Tee and Plane and every other regular in here is a brand.

I find this statement both repugnant and exciting.

[BT]

I find this statement both repugnant and exciting.

Why would the statement be repugnant?

Do you dispute it? Or does truth of it excite you?

[Michael Tee]

I don't know why I laughed at the thought of being a brand, but it was funny.  I guess I liked the idea of universal recognition, which is the point of having branding in the first place, so I guess then I like the idea of being a brand.  It's cool to be a brand.  But . . .

Brands of consumer products are fiercely competitive with other brands of the same product, but brands of like political outlooks try to band together in a common fight, liberals with liberals, conservatives with conservatives.  So in that respect, we're not brands but units of a common cause, be that cause liberal or conservative.

Maybe the big causes are brands - - the Liberal brand, the Conservative brand.

[BT]

The big causes are categories. Obama is a brand, distinct from Hillary. And protecting as well as marketing the brand is key.

[Michael Tee]

<<The big causes are categories. Obama is a brand, distinct from Hillary. And protecting as well as marketing the brand is key. >>

Why aren't the big causes brands, too?

Whatever you want to call the big causes, I'd say the regulars of this group, rather than being brands, are units of support in one or the other of the big causes, not brands in their own right.

[BT]

I'd say the regulars of this group, rather than being brands, are units of support in one or the other of the big causes, not brands in their own right.

It doesn't surprise me that you would look at it like this.

My take is each brings a unique perspective to the cause and that unique perspective is their brand. It's all about the spectrum and positioning the brand upon that spectrum.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I would not have thought the RNC to be that into art.

=========================
They aren't into art. They are into advertising.

Warhol was famous for turning advertising into something that people would view as art.
That doesn't mean it was artistic.

Palin is hype, just like the soup cans and Marilyn Monroe in Warhol's pictures is hype.

People get bored with advertising, which is why ads change frequently. Warhol said that everyone would be famous for just 15 minutes.
The Palin hype probably won't last through November.

[Brassmask]

I find this statement both repugnant and exciting.

Why would the statement be repugnant?

Do you dispute it? Or does truth of it excite you?

I find it repugnant because I don't like the idea of my thoughts, my beliefs and the like being boiled down to just a "brand".

However, it is slightly exciting to think of all the different names competing in some way.

[BT]

I find it repugnant because I don't like the idea of my thoughts, my beliefs and the like being boiled down to just a "brand".

Probably because you don't like the commercial implications of the term.

However if Brand Brass conjured up images of "in your face activism" would you object as much?

[Brassmask]

I find it repugnant because I don't like the idea of my thoughts, my beliefs and the like being boiled down to just a "brand".

Probably because you don't like the commercial implications of the term.

However if Brand Brass conjured up images of "in your face activism" would you object as much?

Well, I don't really consider myself "in your face" or an "activist".

[BT]

Well, I don't really consider myself "in your face" or an "activist".

Perhaps you should work on your brand positioning.