Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T01:47:46.964Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Andy Warhol's “Factory”: The Production Site, Its Context and Its Impact on the Work of Art

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Caroline A. Jones
Caroline A. Jones
Affiliation:
Department of ArtStanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is often observed by historians of postwar American art that painters and sculptors of the 1960s sought a more mechanized “look” for their art. I argue that the changes reflected in the art have their source in a deeper shift – a shift at the level of production, expressed in new studio practices as well as in the space of the artworks themselves.

In the period immediately before, during, and after World War II, the dominant topos of the American artist was that of a solitary (male) genius, alone in his studio, sole witness to the miraculous creation of his art. I demonstrate that artists of the 1960s, against this backdrop of heroic modernism, engaged in a different rhetoric and practice, one based on the models of industry and business. The studio of Andy Warhol, named the “Factory,” is viewed as apodictic of this great change, with its rudimentary assembly line and highly social mode of production.

The change in practice instantiated in Warhol's Factory is significant in and of itself, but I argue further that it expressed itself in the “place of knowledge” – the space within (or in front of) Warhol's paintings and objects, and the newly social space in which they signify. The context for that signification thus becomes crucial to our understanding of the “Warhol phenomenon” celebrated in popular and arthistorical texts. The ambivalencies embedded in Warhol's Factory, where the artist's role oscillated between manager and proletarian worker, are seen as a function of their context. Conflicting signals are also broadcast by the works of art, which speak in the dialect of mass production with the accent of the irreplaceably unique.

Type
Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , Spring 1991 , pp. 101 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alpers, Svetlana. 1988. Rembrandt's Enterprise: The Studio and the Market. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Arango, Douglas. 1967. “Underground Films: Art or Naughty Movies.” Movie TV Secrets, June, unpaginated.Google Scholar
Ashton, Dore. 1972. The New York School: A Cultural Reckoning. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Ashton, Dore. 1982. Twentieth-Century Artists on Art. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Auping, Michael, ed. 1987. Abstract Expressionism: The Critical Developments. Buffalo and New York: Albright-Knox Art Gallery and Abrams Books.Google Scholar
Banham, Reyner. 1986. A Concrete Atlantis: U.S. Industrial Building and European Modern Architecture 1900–1925. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Baziotes, William. 1949. “The Artist and His Mirror.” Right Angle 3(2):3. Anthologized in Tuchman 1970, 40.Google Scholar
“Business in 1961: Automation Speeds Recovery, Boosts Productivity, Pares Jobs.” 1961. Time, December 29, 50–54.Google Scholar
Canaday, John. 1964. “Pop Art Sells On and On – Why?” New York Times Magazine, May 31, 7, 48, 52–53.Google Scholar
Cox, Annette. [1977] 1982. “Art-as-politics: The abstract-expressionist avant-garde and society.” Ph.D. diss. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Google Scholar
Crone, Rainer. 1970. Andy Warhol. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Crone, Rainer, and Wiegand, Winifred. 1972. Die revolutionäre Ästhetik Andy Warhols. Darmstadt: Melzer Verlag.Google Scholar
Cummings, Paul. 1979. Artists in Their Own Words. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, Nat. 1966. “Inside Andy Warhol.” Cavalier Magazine, September, 87–90.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. [1969]1979. “What Is an Author?” Screen 20(1):13–33. Originally published in Bulletin de la Société Française de Philosophie 64(3):73–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galison, Peter. 1987. How Experiments End. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Galison, Peter. 1988. “Physics between War and Peace.” In Science, Technology, and the Military, edited by Mendelsohn, E., Smith, M. R., and Weingart, P., 12:47–86. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Galison, Peter. 1990. “Aufbau/Bauhaus: Logical Positivism and Architectural Modernism.” Critical Inquiry 16(4):709–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodnough, Robert. 1951. “Pollock Paints a Picture.” Art News 50 (May):38–41, 60–61.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Clement. 1947. “The Present Prospects of American Painting and Sculpture.” Horizon 16(93–94):21–30.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Clement. 1961. “Modernist Painting.” Arts Yearbook 4: 103–108. New York: Art Digest.Google Scholar
Guilbaut, Serge. 1983. How New York Stole the Idea of Modern Art. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Haskell, Barbara. 1984. Blam! The Explosion of Pop, Minimalism, and Performance 1958–1964. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art and W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
“Iowa Edifice with Pop Art ‘No Fat,'” In Warhol Archives, scrapbook 3, reel 1.Google Scholar
Klein, Philip. 1976. “The Ethnic Community.” In Pittsburgh, edited by Lubove, Roy, 147–48. New York: Franklin Watts.Google Scholar
König, Kasper, and Hultén, Pontus, Granath, Olle, Warhol, Andy, eds. [1968] 1970. Andy Warhol, 3rd edition. Boston: Boston Book and Art Publisher.Google Scholar
Kornbluth, Jesse. 1988. Pre-Pop Warhol. New York: Panache Press, Random House.Google Scholar
Krauss, Rosalind. 1980. “Reading Photographs as Text.” In Namuth 1980, unpaginated.Google Scholar
Kuspit, Donald. 1977. “Individual and Mass Identity in Urban Art: The New York Case.” Art in America 65(5):66–77.Google Scholar
Livingstone, Marco. 1989. “Do It Yourself: Notes on Warhol's Techniques.” In Andy Warhol: A Retrospective, 63–78. New York: The Museum of Modern Art.Google Scholar
Malanga, Gerard. 1989. Unpublished: Interview by Caroline A. Jones, New York, October 25.Google Scholar
Munce, James F. 1960. Industrial Architecture: An Analysis of International Building Practice. New York: F. W. Dodge Corporation.Google Scholar
Muther, Richard. 1955. Practical Plant Layout. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Namuth, Hans, ed. 1980. Pollock Painting. New York: Agrinde Publications.Google Scholar
Namuth, Hans. 1980. “Photographing Pollock.” In Namuth 1980, unpaginated.Google Scholar
Newman, Barnett. 1948. “The Sublime Is Now.” Tiger's Eye 1(6):52–53.Google Scholar
Newman, Barnett. 1965. Interviewed by David Sylvester, Easter. Reproduced in Auping et al. 1987, 143–45.Google Scholar
O'Brien, Glenn. 1987. “Andy Warhol Talking Too Much.” Parkett 12 (March): 57–67.Google Scholar
Ophir, Adi. 1991. “A Place of Knowledge Recreated: The Library of Michel de Montaigne.” Science in Context 4(1): 163–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“People,” 1969. Time, 17 October, 48.Google Scholar
Pollock, Griselda. 1988. Vision and Difference. New York: Routledge, Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Pollock, Jackson. 1944. Interview by Howard Putzel, Arts and Architecture, 61(2):14. Anthologized in Tuchman 1970, 115–17.Google Scholar
Pollock, Jackson. 1947–1948. “My Painting.” Possibilities 1(1):78–83.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, Ad. 1959. “Seven Quotes.” It Is 4(Autumn):25. Anthologized in Tuchman 1970, 134.Google Scholar
Reise, Barbara. 1970. “The Stance of Barnett Newman.” Studio International, February:49–63.Google Scholar
Rose, Barbara. 1980. “Jackson Pollock: The Artist as Culture Hero.” In Namuth 1980, unpaginated.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Harold. 1947–1948. “Introduction to “Six American Artists’” Possibilities 1(1):75. Anthologized in Tuchman 1970, 18.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Harold. 1952. “The American Action Painters.” Art News 51. Anthologized in Rosenberg 1959.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Harold. 1959. Tradition of the New. New York: Horizon.Google Scholar
Rothko, Mark. 1951. Untitled statement. Interiors 110(May):104. Anthologized in Tuchman 1970, 141.Google Scholar
Rubin, William. 1970. Frank Stella. New York: The Museum of Modern Art.Google Scholar
Sandler, Irving. 1970. The Triumph of American Painting. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Sandler, Irving. 1978. The New York School: The Painters and Sculptors of the Fifties. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, Arthur M. 1948. “Not Left, Not Right, But a Vital Center.” New York Times Magazine, April 4.Google Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1991. “‘The Mind Is Its Own Place’: Science and Solitude in Seventeenth-Century England.” Science in Context 4(1): 191–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Patrick. 1988. Warhol: Conversations about the Artist. Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI Research Press.Google Scholar
“Sold Out Art: More Buyers Than Ever Sail in to a Broadening Market.” 1963. Life, September 20:125–29.Google Scholar
Swenson, G[ene] R. 1963. “What is Pop Art?” Art News 62(7): 24–27, 60–65.Google Scholar
Toffler, Alvin. 1964. The Culture Consumers: A Study of Art and Affluence in America. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Tuchman, Maurice, ed. 1970. New York School: The First Generation. Greenwich: New York Graphic Society.Google Scholar
Vries, Gerd de, ed. 1974. Über Kunst/On Art: Artists' Writings on the Changed Notion of Art after 1965. Cologne: Verlag M. DuMont Schauberg.Google Scholar
Waldman, Diane. 1978. Mark Rothko: A Retrospective. New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.Google Scholar
Warhol, Andy. 1975. The Philosophy of Andy Warhol, From A to B and Back Again. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Warhol, Andy, and Hackett, Pat. 1980. POPism: The Warhol Sixties. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Archives, Warhol. Scrapbooks 1–12, Microfilm reels 1 and 3.Google Scholar
Whyte, William H. 1956. The Organization Man. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Wilson, Sloan. 1955. The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar