As long as they don't go mucking around on the originals, why not? It doesn't "prove" anything; people have been doing things to other generations' art for, well, generations, sometimes good, sometimes bad. In a few years I'm sure they'll go in the other direction - as well they should, since every generation has the right to choose for itself what it considers perfection in beauty.
(This is the BA in Art History speaking....)
...and such a thing has happened before, commercially: The Michelin Man was put on a diet a few years ago, Miss Columbia (that woman holding the torch who is the symbol of Columbia Pictures) has been slenderized a bit. Aunt Jemima, ditto (and possibly Uncle Ben, I'd imagine). Betty Crocker receives regular tweaks. I hear even Playboy centerfolds, the nominally most perfectly sexy of all that we hold to be sexy, have received upgrades via Photoshop - bruises elimiated, razor stubble erased, hips and thighs slightly skinnyized...
It's normal. It's not anything I'll protest against too much, since the pendulum is liable to swing back sooner or later.
(This is the BA in Art History speaking....)
...and such a thing has happened before, commercially: The Michelin Man was put on a diet a few years ago, Miss Columbia (that woman holding the torch who is the symbol of Columbia Pictures) has been slenderized a bit. Aunt Jemima, ditto (and possibly Uncle Ben, I'd imagine). Betty Crocker receives regular tweaks. I hear even Playboy centerfolds, the nominally most perfectly sexy of all that we hold to be sexy, have received upgrades via Photoshop - bruises elimiated, razor stubble erased, hips and thighs slightly skinnyized...
It's normal. It's not anything I'll protest against too much, since the pendulum is liable to swing back sooner or later.
Reply
Leave a comment