photo by me

One of the things that I’m drawn to again and again within my course of studies is rhetorical media.

What does an image relay to the person who views it? What does it mean from the person who has created it?

I think advertisers understand the concepts of rhetorical medial very well. For instance, the minute I see the black silhouette on bright backgrounds with white lines coming from its ears, I think, automatically, iPod, Apple, music, iTunes. It’s brilliant really.

But what about art?

I recently watched a movie, Cradle Will Rock, that addressed this very topic but in a subtle way. It portrayed Diego Rivera painting a historic image on the walls of Rockefeller Center for commission from John D. Rockefeller.

Rivera was a brilliant artist and wanted to paint the past, present, and future. He included scenes from American history. At the time of the painting, Lenin was in power and there were already fears of Americans being coerced by the communists. Rivera also portrayed what he saw for the future. He painted items that were on his mind, including a cell of syphiis.

What Rivera saw as a painting speaking to the state of the world and his vision of it, Rockefeller saw as an offront to the very foundation of the nation. This amazing piece of art that he commissioned was subsequently demolished with hammers.

What made this art so powerful that not only did two men see it differently but that it moved one man to have it demolished?

The Commercial Rhetoric Art Project looks at this topic in a new way. It takes common images that we see each day and rearranges them to give us a different message.

But what makes that message better – or worse? What makes it change an image from advertising to art? And is art an advertisement for an ideology?