In my trip to MoMA, before going inside the galleries to find the paintings, first I went to the gift shop in front of it to see what paintings I would be looking for. I was surprised to see how many reapropiations where they on starry night. It’s crazy to think how when Van Gogh painted this it was considered a really weird painting, but now it is totally main steam and people gather around in big groups taking pictures around it just to admire its beauty.
I don’t believe the impact of the original piece of art changes because of it’s adaptations, but I do believe that both Starry night other Van Gogh’s pieces are perceived as more valuable because of these merchandise. I’m not saying that the works by themselves are not worthy of the fame they got, but they are definitively more known and have a bigger reach than if the pieces of art were by themselves in the museum. I can relate it to the Jordan sneakers, even tough Jordan was an incredible player, I believe that the Jordan sneakers multiplied his reach at least a 3x . It’s like the people can have a little piece of the person they admire. You could be a Lebron fan ,but I haven’t heard anyone complain about how someone stepped on their LeBrons compared to the Jordans.
When I was walking around MoMA I saw a group of people around a tiny painting but I never imagined it would be The Persistence of Memory, I was surprised to see how tiny it was. On the images I’ve seen at class, it’s easy to look at all the details but when you are actually in person it’s kinda hard to appreciate the details, maybe because of the continous group of people around it or it’s size . But overall I would consider it is different feeling seeing it in person, when you see the texture, you can imagine the artist painting it, compared to when you see it in a picture or in these case a key chain or a vest that just reminds you that piece of art.
