The incomparable smiles of two global icons: A century of Marilyn Monroe

This year marks the centenary of the birth of Marilyn MonroeThe world-famous Hollywood star, about whose public and private life almost everything is known, has found herself in the focus of interest of the world's media.

Although it has already been repeated, it has not diminished the public's interest in the phenomenon of pin-up model Norma Jean Mortensen who transformed into pop icon Marilyn Monroe. For years, and even today, this phenomenon has been viewed from various domains. From film and popular culture to psychological and sociological analyses and studies, attempts are being made to determine what the unquestionable status of the myth of Marilyn Monroe is based on. To what extent this phenomenon is reflected in contemporary fine art is confirmed by the example of pop art artists Andy WarholHis work Shot Blue Marilyn Monroe, from 1964, has become one of the most popular symbols of visual art of the twentieth century. In a contemporary society that is particularly characterized by the phenomenon of consumerism, the culture of window displays where everything is offered and sold, pop art has found a rich source for its art. Thus, Coca-Cola bottles, various cans, objects of practical use, comics or posters, among other things, have become elements of the new pop art iconography.

Everything that belongs to the decor of everyday reality, a phenomenon of today in which the media plays a strong role, which also includes mass appeal, marketing, advertising, Theodor Adorno called the phrase of critical tone "culture industry". In this and such a reality, not only objects of mass consumption are exploited, but also stars of the society of spectacle and glamour, especially those from the world of film. In this sense and in the spirit of the times, Marilyn Monroe becomes a kind of product, an artistic commodity that is successfully placed on the market. Observed in this context, a thought arose in my mind as a problem related to the aforementioned Warhol painting. Namely, is the popularity of a work of art necessarily proportional to its formal aesthetic quality or does this popularity arise from the cultural meaning of the motif that is depicted. This seems to me to be indicative of Warhol's painting Shot Blue Marilyn MonroeI believe that the fame of these pop art paintings is more due to the fame of the Hollywood star than to any exceptional artistic and aesthetic quality of the work. Because, from an artistic and aesthetic point of view, Warhol's portraits of famous women are on the same level, if not more inventive in a creative sense. Elizabeth Taylor, Tina Turner or Brigitte BardotTo name just a few.

The extent to which the pop culture art industry can profit is demonstrated by the fact that at an auction in New York in 2022, the Warhol painting in question was sold for a then-record 195 million dollars. On that occasion, George Frey, chairman of the board of the Thomas and Doris Aman Foundation, stated that the painting of Marilyn Monroe speaks of her “undiminished visual power in this millennium.” But even more significant are his words in which he points out that “the terrible circumstances of her life and death have been forgotten,” and concludes by saying “only the enigmatic smile remains that connects her to another mysterious smile, that of the distinguished lady Mona Lisa.” In the purely visual meaning of the work of art and its layers, comparing Warhol’s Marilyn Monroe, perhaps the most significant pop art work with a masterpiece of painting art such as Leonardova Mona Liza Đokonda is very problematic. But the logic of capital has a clearly conceived strategy which in this particular case means that the comparison with Leonardo's most important work automatically increases the status of Warhol's painting. So, if one says that they are Mona Liza Đokonda i Marilyn Monroe comparable as cultural icons, it only speaks to the thesis, or rather the reception and social status of the painting. Thus, both paintings have become, paradoxically, much more than a work of art. In this context, they transcend themselves, which means that they continue to exist as globally recognizable symbols, as common places in the history of art. However, when one moves from the level of cultural myth to the level of the portrait itself and begins to talk about the kinship of their smiles, one enters an area where the differences are much greater than the similarities. The Mona Lisa's smile was created as a result of a particularly complex painting process that still arouses the interest of experts and art lovers today. The ambiguity of Mona Lisa's smile also stems from the way her face was painted, how it was modeled with subtle transitions of tones, that Leonardo's sfumato procedure that especially contributes to suggesting the psychological ambivalence of the expression of the young Renaissance lady. Neither an expert nor an observer of the painting can say with certainty what the Mona Lisa is feeling, to whom she is mysteriously smiling with both her lips and eyelids. It is from such uncertainty that the well-known sense of mystery arises. In Warhol's Marilyn Monroe The situation is significantly different. The face of a Hollywood star is not treated as a psychological study of a person, as an artist's attempt to express something of the secret being of a tragic heroine. Using a painting technique typical of Warhol, the artist chose a photograph of a famous actress and transferred it to the canvas using the screen printing technique, intervening additionally with coloristic accents. (This is how a series of variations of the same portrait was created.) In this way, Warhol transformed the reproduction of a media image into an icon of pop culture. Therefore, in the spirit of pop art aesthetics or philosophy, the psychological nuance of the actress's portrait is not at the heart of Warhol's way of expression. Especially if we bear in mind the painter's statement: "The reason I paint in this way lies in the fact that I want to be a machine, and I feel that every thing I do like a machine is exactly what I want to do". It should also be added what he says E. L. Smith in a text about this artist. “It is not certain whether Warhol personally intervened in the creation of the paintings that appear under his name, because he is convinced that art must have the same meaning of anonymity as the life around us”. Warhol consciously reduces individuality and turns the person into a symbol of mass culture. Because of the above, it is difficult to accept Frey's claim that there is a real kinship between the smile of Mona Lisa and Marilyn Monroe. If the observer of Warhol's painting sees sadness, fragility of being, or a premonition of tragedy in the actress's face, this stems from his knowledge of the life story of the unfortunate star, and not from what Warhol expressed in her portrait.

Therefore, Mona Lisa and Marilyn Monroe can only be compared as works of art in the context of global symbols and not in the context of artistic concepts because they are based on radically different ways of expression. Therefore, Frey's comparison can only be sustainable on one level but is unsustainable on another. In the context of contemporary liberal capitalist society, sensational records of sales of works of art in the millions are achieved in spectacular auctions, as was the case with Shot Blue Marilyn Monroe, which automatically attracted the attention of the world public. In terms of the material valuation of the most popular ladies in the history of art, the differences are also significant. The smile of Warhol's Marilyn Monroe as an icon of pop art can vary, depending on the current trend or the spirit of the times, while the smile of Leonardo's Renaissance lady Mona Lisa remains priceless. That is why the Mona Lisa still smiles serenely to millions of visitors to the Louvre in Paris. Exhibited behind impenetrable protective glass, it seems as if she is watching us from the other side of life.