There is one photograph that never needed a Creative Commons license. Che Guevara as photographed by Alberto Korda is an image that has invaded pop culture and art. I have seen it on tshirts, restaurant menus, backpacks, CD cover art and what not. What Andy Warhol did for Marilyn Monroe, the world did to that one photograph. Morphed into one of the best-selling images. The photographer is said to have said “As a supporter of the ideals for which Che Guevara died, I am not averse to its reproduction by those who wish to propagate his memory and the cause of social justice throughout the world, but I am categorically against the exploitation of Che’s image for the promotion of products such as alcohol, or for any purpose that denigrates the reputation of Che.” So when and how did a Guerilla tactician become a poster boy? Richard Gott traces the story of the iconic image.
Korda took two shots, the first with Guevara framed alone between an anonymous silhouette and the frond of a palm tree, and the second with someone’s head appearing above his shoulder. The first picture, with the intruding material edited out, became the original famous portrait. Neither photograph attracted the attention of the picture desk of Korda’s newspaper. Other shots were available of the Cuban and foreign dignitaries at the funeral parade, as well as of Castro speaking, and these were the ones used in the paper. Korda’s photo of Che was first printed a year later in an advertisement for a lecture that Guevara was about to give in April 1961. It appeared twice, because the lecture was postponed as a result of the Bay of Pigs invasion by US-backed Cuban exiles that had been expected at the time the photograph had been taken.
V&A has an exbition on in London . There’s even a series of podcasts discussing the iconic image and art. (Note to self – Must go and see!)
On the subject of communism and icons – here’s something on Soviet underwear. Dr Ola Gurova has been studying underwear in the erstwhile USSR.
In the 1920s, Soviet magazines touted a “regime of cleanliness” for the proletariat. “Underwear,” explains Gurova, “was a compulsory part of that regime.” A goal was established: everyone should have at least two sets, and should change sets at least once every 7-10 days. Mass production was cranked up, underclothing the populace in officially healthy, comfortable, hygienic long johns, boxers, undershirts and bras. Gurova’s research shows that most of these items were “spacious”, and that “there was no big difference in design between male and female underclothes”.
Posted on June 6th, 2006 by Neha Viswanathan
Filed under: Culture, History and Monuments
I thought V&A always meant Vulnerability and Adaptation….
Trust the most missed and lamented Fatherland to come up with such wacko underwear social policies. lol But then isn’t it said that the best things you can have in times of war is a good pair of boots and clean socks? Maybe Soviet underwear is an extension of this.
anonymouspal: Buddy pal! Finally you comment on my blog. So thrilled! Well, all I know about development I learnt from you, so yes I take your word for it. :)
Anon2: Boots? That always makes me think of All Quiet on the Western Front. Something about boots – I think the character called Kemmerich dies and tells a certain Paul to give Müller his boots. Something about symbolism and death. Fascinating.
I feel so conflicted about Che’s image. On the one hand, it’s great that kids in the suburbs can identify with a revolutionary fighter – maybe it’ll spur them to learn more. On the other hand – he’s now being used to sell lip balm. That’s so depressing. I saw a t-shirt with that image and the slogan “I have no idea who this is.” I thought it was appropriate, unfortunately.
I can’t say I lament the Fatherland that put so many good Communists to death. But the social engineering of the early Soviet regime is fascinating: they really had a sense that they were remaking the world, heightening the cultural level of the masses (‘culture’ in the older, social sense of the word, not only art.)
Trotsky has some great pieces in the collection “Problems of Everyday Life” which detail that effort. Like outlawing the word ‘thou’ in the army – reserved for officers and one’s social betters – and replacing it with ‘you’, to introduce linguistic equality. Like many measures – legalized abortion & homosexuality, collective kitchens, artistic pluralism – it didn’t last, but it showed a glimpse into what even a poor revolutionary society can accomplish.
Thanks for the chance to go on about communism & the USSR :-)
Victor: I find the concept of icons interesting. At some point in time – the icon changes association. Then the icon no longer serves the “original purpose”. But the idea behind releasing anything into the public domain is to respect what people do with it .. no?
Even in Soviet art, this need to be “realistic” while the rest of the world went ga-ga over cubist perspectives is fascinating. I could never be a communist – I am too much of an individualist for that – and I think it’s interesting that most communist icons were all powerful and charismatic individuals. Thanks for the Trotsky tip!