The Andy Warhol page on Wikipedia has 100 citations that vary from newspaper articles (such as the Economist), magazine articles (such as The New Yorker), commercial websites (like warhola.com, which does not identify the site’s author), publications from universities, museum and gallery websites and commercial publications (such as Bantam Books). With such a broad scope of sources, the Wikipedia article would have to be dissected piece by piece in order to find out what is accurate information. For example, sentences ending with a citation from a website like warhola.com may not be as accurate as a sentence with a citation from the University of Toronto Press written by a history PhD.

Under the “talk” tab of Andy Warhol’s Wikipedia article, it states “Andy Warhol was nominated as a good article in the category but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.” Some of the comments made under this statement are people who seem to have fact checked certain bits of information and have given legitimate sources to back their claim against the sources used to back the fact in question. These comments are as recent as September 2, 2011 so it is a little curious that the article has not been renominated as a “good article” yet. The lack of conversion can either point to a loss of interest in improving the article or a general consensus that it has fulfilled the “good article criteria”.

According to the history of the article, however, revisions have been made as recent as earlier today. The revisions are very small, which is possibly why they have not been discussed on the “talk” page. Looking at the page as of May this year, it is clear that many changes have been made, such as removing some sections that didn’t have citations and editing other sections or moving them about to make the article clearer. Many of the people listed have made several revisions over time, which indicates that they are keeping an eye on the article and checking any new information that is posted. As a result, the Andy Warhol Wikipedia page seems pretty sound as a whole but as with any article, the references for specific bits of information should be checked.

Revised research question:

How did Andy Warhol’s personal life influence his stardom and affect the way his art was received by the public?

Research:

On archive finder I was unable to find an archive on Andy Warhol but he is included in the index terms for a few archives including, Joe Brainard and Harper’s Magazine.

In the Proquest Historical Newspapers database, I found an article by Paul Richard called “Andy Warhol: A Telling Eye on the Empty”, which describes Warhol not only as an artist but “as a prophet, a medium and a force”. This article helps explain that Warhol’s persona influenced the art scene just as his artwork did. It shows that it is important to learn about Warhol’s life in order to realize the impact he made on the art world.

On flickr commons I found a picture of Andy Warhol that demonstrates the sort of image he was trying to create for himself. He is known for his wispy, blond hair, pale face and eyes that seem empty. Also his hands are very prominent in the photograph, emphasizing his role as an artist who creates and molds images with his own hands. Unfortunately, I was unable to post this photograph in this blog because flickr commons did not allow it. But its url is: http://www.flickr.com/photos/natgibso/3129874298/lightbox/

In Errol Morris’ article “Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?”, I found Morris’ journey of research in determining the order in which Fenton’s photographs at Crimea were taken particularly interesting. In the first part, Morris researches different scholars’ opinions of the photographs and through this he comes to the conclusion that they base their arguments on Fenton’s psychological character. For all these scholars, it is important to know the artist’s intention in order to better understand the work. The problem with this is that we can never actually know what Fenton was thinking while taking the photographs (even with the information found in the the letters he wrote) and so everything from this point has to be speculation. In effect, the scholars make different assumptions about Fenton’s character and were more interested in that, than the evidence provided in the work itself. In parts two and three, Morris leaves the scholars and instead becomes obsessed with the photographs themselves and the evidence they can provide. His process then becomes based on scientific analysis rather than psychological analysis. From this, it becomes clear that Morris believes that the photographs themselves bear not just more information but more accurate information, then the artist.

The artist: Roger Fenton

One of the photographs: Valley of the Shadow of Death (ON version)

I find this extremely interesting because it closely relates to a method of art history known as semiotics. This method contains a theory known as the “Death of the Author” in which the author of a work no longer gives the work meaning and instead the signs within the work provide its meaning. From a semiotic perspective, it is not important to know or examine an artist’s motivation behind a work because he is not what gives the work meaning. Alternatively, we should examine the signs or symbols found within a work and try to understand what meanings those signs had during the time in which they were made. For example, take Titian’s painting Venus of Urbino and notice the dog laying down behind the woman. When this painting was created, dogs were seen as symbols of fidelity and Titian used this sign so that his viewers would understand a message: the woman in the painting is virtuous and faithful. It is important to note that Titian has not given the dog this meaning and instead the society he was living in has constructed this meaning according to convention.

As a result, Morris’ shift from researching scholarly opinions of Fenton’s intentions and character to examining the element of the photographs themselves proves the fact that meaning is embedded in the art itself, not its creator.

The dog is a cultural symbol for fidelity

Under what circumstances (life events, historical events, artistic events) did Andy Warhol lead the art movement known as Pop Art and how did these circumstances affect his art?

In Cohen and Rosenzweig’s chapter, Becoming Digital I found the section discussing ways to make text digital most interesting. After explaining different methods for digitalizing text, such as scanning and OCR, the authors come to this point:

“Although it seems counterintuitive, studies have concluded that the time spent correcting a small number of OCR errors can wind up exceeding the cost of typing the document from scratch.”

I find this statement particular interesting because despite all the technologies we have created to make our lives easier and more efficient, the most basic and archaic method of digitalizing text can often times be the more accurate, less expensive and less time-consuming method. To me this is like telling someone that it would be cheaper, faster and easier for them to take a horse-drawn carriage to California rather than drive a car or ride an airplane. Like cars and airplanes, scanners and OCRs are meant to provide faster and better results than older methods but as anyone who has a car knows, sometimes they can create even bigger problems and be extremely frustrating to fix.

This goes to show that although we have come a long way with technology, we still have a ways to go before we can give up the “tried-and-true” systems we have been using for years. It is comforting to know that technology is not perfect and that computers are not smarter than us. It may be amazing what technology can do for us but nothing can beat what we can do for ourselves.

Old fashioned? Yes, but maybe more effective.

Better? Not necessarily, this method is prone to errors.

This is an important header.

This is a less important header.

This is a paragraph.

• Item 1
• Item 2
• Item 3

1. Item 1
2. Item 2

Link to google.

1) 1990s Grunge

2) Andy Warhol and Pop Art

3) Elvis Presley and rock

From Cohen and Rosenzweig’s second chapter of Digital History titled Getting Started: The Basic Technologies Behind the Web, I found the section Naming Your Site and Presenting It to the World the most interesting. In this section the authors discuss website addresses and the nature of URLs. URLs are what allows computers to locate certain web pages in cyberspace so needless to say they are very important. Apparently, servers are named by numerical combinations but now have become more accessible because of a new system that uses letters and words. In order to demonstrate this the authors use the example of the a particular Internet Protocol address, showing first the numerical address and then explaining how it translates into words and letters using a technology called Domain Name System.

What I found particularly interesting about this information is that creators of the web had the insight to realize that an average person would not be able to memorize numerical codes so they created a technology that would make the web more accessible. I was also surprised to find out the IP addresses work backwards and contain different domains that help narrow down the search. Despite the fact that IP addresses are read backwards, this reminds me of accession numbers used by museums to record their collections. Like with accession numbers, IP addresses categorize information into smaller and smaller groups one domain at a time. Until now, I was unaware that the web organizes cyberspace much like how we organize knowledge in other areas like museums. As a result, the more I find out about the infrastructure of the web, the less foreign it seems to me.