(Jimmy Fallon as Walter White and Steve Higgins as Jesse from Breaking Bad)
Recently we have been discussing the term parody and we have previously discussed the aspect of image icons in visual culture. The image above conveys both of these concepts. The image above is a parody by Jimmy Fallon because he is mimicking the AMC’s hit drama called Breaking Bad. Jimmy made an entire video short where he alters things from his famous night show and makes them fit into moments from Breaking Bad. While watching the video and then looking at this image I started to think deeper into what elements were really giving this image meaning as a parody. There have been many parodies made about Breaking Bad, but this one has been popular among the other parodies because Jimmy Fallon is a famous icon in our society. This image is using an icon to make fun of other icons and this gives a lot of viewers a greater sense of meaning. If the parody was done by someone that they were not familiar with I feel as though they wouldn’t take away as much meaning. A possible sense of meaning that viewers may have with the image is through ethos and pathos. Ethos because it is credible and pathos because right away it evokes emotions to the viewer because Jimmy Fallon is famous. Many viewers immediately have a good feeling from the image because Jimmy has established himself as a credible comedian who typically gives viewers good emotions. I realize that my argument may be far-fetched, but that was just my initial reaction when I thought past it being an obvious parody and analyzed the meaning that the image was conveying.
(Left) Art Rogers, “Puppies” 1985 (Right) Jeff Koons, “String of Puppies” 1988
Art Rogers was a photographer who took the photograph Puppies in 1985 and used it for greeting cards. The image shows a man and a woman each happily holding four puppies in their arms and it delivers a sense of joy to the viewer. About three years later in 1988, artist Jeff Koons used Rogers photograph to create a statue of the image. He brought the image to life with color and human sized figures and made a decent profit off of the statue. Rogers wasn’t too pleased and sued Koons for copyright issues. The court found that the pieces of artwork were too similar and thus, Koons lost and had to pay Rogers for copyrighting his photograph.
I chose these pieces of artwork because it is an important case in terms of appropriation and copyright issues. The artwork took a political turn when Koons was profiting a lot off of Rogers work because it was so similar that it needed to be settled in court. It brings up a lot of questions in terms of appropriation and it made me mainly think, by what means can you really build up upon on someone else’s work? Rogers photography is also significant because it displays more than just a documentation of life, but it reveals photography being used for creative expression. Creative expression that was so powerful that it drove Koons to bring it to life size. In terms of how to settle copyright and appropriation, I found myself leaning with the textbook approach. The textbook mentioned the idea of paying a fee to the artist if you are going to use their art for inspiration and this inspiration of the original piece is clearly shown in the new artists work.
(Advertising Agency: Saatchi&Saatchi Simko, Geneva, Switzerland
Creative Director: Olivier Girard
Art Director: Nicolas Poulain
Copywriter: Jean-Michel Larsen
Body painter: Guido Daniele)
Over the years the World Wildlife Fund has created many powerful advertising campaigns to keep harm and degradation away from our planet’s natural resources. One of their movements known as the “Give A Hand To Wildlife,” displayed a series of influential images with various animals painted onto a human hand. All of the images in the campaign gave off multiple perspectives because of the various realistic components contained within each image. Through the images perspectives and realistic attributes I felt that they would fit perfectly with the themes of realism and perspective that we began to address this week in class.
The image that I picked out of the campaign series is the painting of an elephant on a human hand that portrayed two different perspectives. When first looking at the image I saw an elephant and then immediately after my perspective morphed the idea of it being an elephant into a human hand. The image has a different point-of-view from when you first glance at it as opposed to when you stare at it longer. The artist creates a different point-of-view because their perspective is for the viewer to understand their slogan and message through the image alone. The hand symbolizes help and the need to “give a hand” whereas the elephant symbolizes wildlife as a whole. The artist wants this message to be conveyed immediately through the image and that is why the message to “give a hand to wildlife” is in the upper corner in small print. The ability to use the natural creases in a human hand fits perfectly with the many creases that are often seen on an elephant making the image realistic and naturalistic. The soft gray and whites being used make the hand appear closer and stand out from the background that is a plain, dark gray. Lastly, there is an apparent aspect of episteme being used in the image because it is easy to link the image to the world. The artist uses the hand as a depiction of an innocent elephant to portray an impression to the viewer that the elephant is in need of help. Through this one image the observer is able to connect and relate with a current world problem and that is one of the main reasons I feel as though this advertising campaign is extremely powerful.