endangeredomega wrote:The "S" theme isn't overly clear to me either, but my larger issue is with the blatant pandering, and use of others' intellectual property. As a general rule, I'm just not a fan of the pop-culture reference shirts at all. There are exceptions, of course, in which the artist presents the familiar in a new, different, or quirky way, (Radishes, Batrobin, etc.) but to me, this shirt does none of those things. It's simply taken popular, established images and slapped smiley faces and arms & legs on them.
First, I think its important to highlight that this doesn't "use" another persons/corporation intellectual property. While IP laws can be incredibly subjective... an artistic rendition of a pop culture icon certainly doesn't qualify.
Secondly, I love quirky shirts like this that blatantly pander to the 20-something geek culture that dominates woot. The value of such shirts IS their simplicity and ability to identify with lots of people. On the other hand, there are artist on this site that obviously spend hours making elaborate designs that are filled with detail and subtext; but, these shirts also tend not to consider the anatomy of a person wearing them. I don't want someone staring at my chest for 20 minutes trying to deduce the inner meaning of a piece of art.... I simply want a cheap, well-made shirt to wear to the gym and perhaps start a conversation (and you start conversations on pop culture).
Art is subjective. If you asked me what art is... I would tell you its the great human endeavor of spending much time accomplishing nothing. Just look at some artist that are idolize... Andy Warhog drew cans of soup and Jackson Pollock looks like he took LSD and PCP while holding a paintbrush. So compared to some individuals the art community idolized, I think drawing smile faces, legs, and arms on pop-icons is a step in the right direction.
