"In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes." — Andy Warhol
That was a quote which appeared in a 1968 art exhibition by Andy Warhol. It seems rather puzzling when you first read it. How is that even possible? What would fame even entail in a world where everyone can have it?
First, we need to unpack what Warhol exactly meant. Warhol rose to fame in the 1960s, most notably with his prints of Campbell’s Soup Cans in 1962. This was revolutionary at the time, as Warhol dared to turn mundane objects into works of art. Upon its premiere, critics and audiences were scratching their heads asking themselves “This is art?” Today, many consider the Campbell’s Soup Cans to be one of the finest works of art. But why was it so impactful decades after its premiere? The answer requires a little analysis of aesthetics, or what constitutes beauty.
Now think of the most renowned works of art in history. Some might include Mona Lisa, The Statue of David, Starry Night, American Gothic, and Persistence of Memory. The names alone invoke images of the paintings themselves. Campbell’s Soup Cans, the very prints that baffled critics upon its release, rank among them. Why? Over time it broke the aesthetic hierarchy, meaning that the rules which long governed beauty and art were completely washed away. A can of soup has as much artistic value as a sculpture of a nude biblical figure. Now, what does this mean for fame altogether? It means popular culture is now a form of high culture.
Think of some of the most renowned figures in history: George Washington (Carver), Martin Luther King Jr., W.E.B. DuBois, Abraham Lincoln. Each contributed to society in their own way and left lasting impact on culture and memory: leading an army, finding crop alternatives, championing civil rights, defining black consciousness, ending slavery.
Now compare them with someone like PewDiePie or Kim Kardashian. The fame surrounding them is in a completely different light. You can measure their fame in numbers, by subscribers on YouTube or followers on Twitter. Going back to Martin Luther King Jr., you can’t measure his fame in numbers; he was nonetheless part of something greater than himself, the March on Washington and the Civil Rights Movement altogether. Kim Kardashian is her own brand. She is a sex tape, a clothing line, a reality television star, and the so-called “Queen of Selfies.” PewDiePie isn’t even a real person, it’s a persona. When someone subscribes to PewDiePie’s channel, they are subscribing to that persona. Not Felix Kjellberg.
In terms of business and economics, fame in the twenty-first century robs personhood and replaces it with commodification. When you hear the name Gucci, do you think of handbags or Guccio Gucci? When you hear the name Adidas, do you think of sportswear or Adolf Dassler? When you hear the name J.P. Morgan, do you think of the bank or J.P. Morgan himself? Brand name seemed to have replaced the names of the very people who invented them.
There is an exception, though. When you hear the name Microsoft, you might think of Bill Gates. When you hear the name Apple, you might think of Steve Jobs. The names Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are very closely associated with their respective companies because it was their own visions that revolutionized personal technology. They both became famous for turning their ideas into realities. They were innovators. The same goes for Henry Ford, who revolutionized auto manufacturing with moving assembly line which then led to mass-produced automobiles in the US.
Now how does this all tie back to Warhol’s fifteen minutes of fame? The first conclusion I can make is that it no longer takes grand ideas to become famous; it only takes personality. This certainly makes it easier for any individual to become famous, especially with access to social media sites like YouTube, Twitter, Tumblr, and Instagram. The second conclusion is that due to this fundamental change in what it takes to become famous, standards have plummeted. On YouTube Tyler Oakley has 7.8 million subscribers and is almost universally loved by viewers whereas Jake Paul has over 12 million subscribers and WatchMojo has made videos on why he is hated. The cost of becoming “Instafamous” has left us obsessing over our own notoriety, devoid of fresh ideas, and out of touch with what we should value in society.