How to marÂket a book like LoliÂta, which, upon its pubÂliÂcaÂtion in 1955, promptÂly found itself banned in France, Britain, New Zealand, ArgentiÂna and othÂer counÂtries? CareÂfulÂly. At least at first.
This just a small samÂpling of what you will find in the CovÂerÂing LoliÂta Archive, a gallery that curÂrentÂly conÂtains 210 book and media covÂers from 40 counÂtries, spanÂning 58 years.
The archive brings you right up to 2014. (2015 and 2016 will likeÂly be accountÂed for pretÂty soon.) If you have a favorite design, please let us know in the comÂments secÂtion below.
If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newsletÂter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bunÂdled in one email, each day.
If you would like to supÂport the misÂsion of Open CulÂture, conÂsidÂer makÂing a donaÂtion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your conÂtriÂbuÂtions will help us conÂtinÂue proÂvidÂing the best free culÂturÂal and eduÂcaÂtionÂal mateÂriÂals to learnÂers everyÂwhere. You can conÂtribute through PayÂPal, PatreÂon, and VenÂmo (@openculture). Thanks!
Oh to be euloÂgized by PatÂti Smith, GodÂmothÂer of Punk, poet, best-sellÂing author.
Her memÂoir, Just Kids, was born of a sacred deathbed vow to her first boyfriend, phoÂtogÂraÂphÂer Robert MapÂplethorÂpe.
Its folÂlow up, M Train, startÂed out as an exerÂcise in writÂing about “nothÂing at all,” only to wind up as an eleÂgy to her late husÂband, guiÂtarist Fred “SonÂic” Smith. (Their daughÂter sugÂgestÂed that her dad “was probÂaÂbly annoyed that Robert got so much attenÂtion in the othÂer book.”)
She and husÂband Smith celÂeÂbratÂed their first anniverÂsary by colÂlectÂing stones from the French Guiana penal colony, Saint-LauÂrent-du-Maroni, in an effort to feel closÂer to Jean Genet, one of her most revered authors.
She believes in the transÂmuÂtaÂtion of objects, unabashedÂly lobÂbyÂing to libÂerÂate the walkÂing stick that accomÂpaÂnied VirÂginia Woolf to her death from the NYPL’s colÂlecÂtion in order to comÂmune with it furÂther. She may turn into a gibÂberÂing fanÂgirl in face to face meetÂings with the authors she admires, but interÂactÂing with relics of those who have gone before has a cenÂterÂing effect.
NeedÂless to say, her fame grants her access to items the rest of us are lucky to view though the walls of a vitÂrine.
She has paged through Sylvia Plath’s childÂhood noteÂbooks and gripped Charles DickÂens’ surÂprisÂingÂly modÂest pen. She has ““perÂpetÂuÂatÂed rememÂbrance” by comÂing into close conÂtact with BobÂby FisÂchÂer’s chess table, FriÂda Kahlo’s leg braces, and a hotel room favored by Maria Callas. Her recÂolÂlecÂtion of these events is both revÂerÂenÂtial and impÂish, the stuff of a dozen anecÂdotes.
Where tanÂgiÂble souÂvenirs prove eluÂsive, Smith takes phoÂtographs.
InterÂviewÂer HoldÂenÂgräber is uniqueÂly equipped to share in Smith’s litÂerÂary pasÂsions, egging her on with quotes recitÂed from memÂoÂry, includÂing this beauÂty by RainÂer Maria Rilke:
Now loss, howÂevÂer cruÂel, is powÂerÂless against posÂsesÂsion, which it comÂpletes, or even, affirms: loss is, in fact, nothÂing else than a secÂond acquisition–but now comÂpleteÂly interiorized–and just as intense.
(The senÂtiÂment is so loveÂly, who can blame him for invokÂing it in preÂviÂous conÂverÂsaÂtion with NYPL guests, artist Edmund de Waal and pianist Van Cliburn.)
The topÂic can get heavy, but Smith is a conÂsumÂmate enterÂtainÂer whose clownÂish brinkmanÂship leads her to cite Jimi HenÂdrix: “Hooray, I wake from yesÂterÂday.”
The great horÂror actors of the genre’s goldÂen age—the time of DracÂuÂla, FrankenÂstein, The MumÂmy, and yet more DracÂuÂla—sucÂceedÂed on the strength of their highÂly unconÂvenÂtionÂal looks. Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, and ChristoÂpher Lee were not faces you would pass on the street withÂout a secÂond look. But they sucÂceedÂed equalÂly because all three, includÂing Karloff, made use of some very well trained voices—voices honed for the theÂatriÂcal.
They have eleÂvatÂed even the campÂiÂest mateÂrÂiÂal through the use of their voicÂes, and furÂther eleÂvatÂed many already great stoÂries by readÂing them aloud. Bela Lugosi conÂtributed his HunÂgarÂiÂan-accentÂed bariÂtone to a readÂing of Poe’s “The TellÂtale Heart,” soundÂing in every line like he might break into “I vant to suck your blood.” Karloff, the more verÂsaÂtile voice actor, narÂratÂed Aesop’s Fables, RudÂyard Kipling’s Just So StoÂries, and too many othÂer books to list.
Lee read DracÂuÂla once before, in an adapÂtaÂtion made for a graphÂic novÂel in 1966. Here, he reads Bram StokÂer’s novÂel unabridged, unlike some of the othÂer books. You can purÂchase these in a comÂpiÂlaÂtion CD. Or you can hear them on SpoÂtiÂfy for free, either in your browsÂer or using their softÂware. (Hear PhanÂtom of the Opera here and The HunchÂback of Notre Dame here). HowÂevÂer you hear his readÂings, like all of Lee’s voicework—even his heavy metÂal ChristÂmas album—these narÂraÂtions pracÂtiÂcalÂly vibrate with omiÂnous tenÂsion and susÂpense.
LookÂing for free, proÂfesÂsionÂalÂly-read audio books from Audible.com? Here’s a great, no-strings-attached deal. If you start a 30 day free triÂal with Audible.com, you can downÂload two free audio books of your choice. Get more details on the offer here.
RecentÂly, a MetafilÂter user asked the quesÂtion: which books do you reread again and again, and why— whether for “comÂfort, difÂfiÂculÂty, humour, idenÂtiÂfiÂcaÂtion, whatÂevÂer”? It got me thinkÂing about a few of the ways I’ve disÂcovÂered such books.
WritÂing an essay or book about a novÂel is one good way to find out how well it holds up under mulÂtiÂple readÂings. You stare at plot holes, implauÂsiÂble charÂacÂter develÂopÂment, inconÂsisÂtent chronoloÂgies, and othÂer litÂerÂary flaws (or maybe feaÂtures) for weeks, months, someÂtimes even years. And you also live with the lanÂguage that first seduced you, the charÂacÂters who drew you in, the images, places, atmosÂpheres you can’t forÂget….
But readÂing alone can mean that blind spots nevÂer get addressed. We hold to our biasÂes, posÂiÂtive and negÂaÂtive, despite ourÂselves. AnothÂer great way to test the duraÂbilÂiÂty of work of ficÂtion is to teach it for years, or othÂerÂwise read it in a group of engaged peoÂple, who will see what you don’t, can’t, or won’t, and help betÂter your appreÂciÂaÂtion (or deepÂen your disÂlike).
HavÂing spent many years doing both of these things as a stuÂdent and teacher, there are a few books that surÂvived semesÂter after semesÂter, and still sit promiÂnentÂly on my shelves, where at any time I can pull them down, open them up, and be immeÂdiÂateÂly absorbed. Then there are books I read when younger, and which seemed so mysÂteÂriÂous, so posÂsessed of an almost reliÂgious sigÂnifÂiÂcance, I returned to them again and again—looking for the most enchantÂed senÂtences.
If I had to narÂrow down to a short list the books I conÂsisÂtentÂly reread, those books would come out of all three expeÂriÂences above, and they would include, in no necÂesÂsary order—
AbsaÂlom, AbsaÂlom!, by William FaulknÂer: I’ve writÂten sevÂerÂal essays on this novÂel, over the course of sevÂerÂal years, and I love it as much or more as when I first picked it up. It’s a book that becomes both more grim and more darkÂly humorÂous as time goes on; its verÂtigÂiÂnous narÂraÂtive stratÂeÂgy creÂates an inexÂhaustible numÂber of ways to see the stoÂry.
WutherÂing Heights, by EmiÂly Bronte: I read this novÂel as a child and underÂstood almost nothÂing about it but the ghostÂly setÂting of “wiley, windy moors” (as Kate Bush described it) and the furiÂous emoÂtionÂal intenÂsiÂty of HeathÂcliff and CatherÂine. These eleÂments kept me comÂing back to disÂcovÂer just how much Bronte—like Faulkner—encircles her readÂer in a cyclone of posÂsiÂbilÂiÂty; mulÂtiÂple stoÂries, told from mulÂtiÂple charÂacÂters, times, and places, swirl around, nevÂer setÂtling on what we most want in real life but nevÂer get there either—simple answers.
Song of Solomon, by Toni MorÂriÂson: Morrison’s novÂel extracts from the 20th cenÂtuÂry African AmerÂiÂcan expeÂriÂence a tale of proÂfound indiÂvidÂual strugÂgle, as charÂacÂters in her ficÂtionÂal famÂiÂly fight to define themÂselves against social inequities and to tranÂscend oppresÂsive idenÂtiÂties. Their failÂures to do so are just as poignant as their sucÂcessÂes, and charÂacÂters like Pilate and MilkÂman achieve an almost archeÂtypÂal sigÂnifÂiÂcance through the course of the novÂel. MorÂriÂson creÂates modÂern myth.
The YidÂdish PoliceÂman’s Union, by Michael Chabon. I taught this novÂel for years because it seemed like, and was, a great way to introÂduce stuÂdents to the comÂpliÂcaÂtions of plot, the joys of specÂuÂlaÂtive ficÂtion, and the empaÂthetÂic imagÂinÂing of othÂer peoÂple and culÂtures that the novÂel can enable. I can think of many ways some critÂics might find Chabon’s book politÂiÂcalÂly “probÂlemÂatÂic,” but my conÂsisÂtent enjoyÂment of its wild-eyed stoÂry has nevÂer diminÂished since I first picked up the book and read it straight through in a couÂple of days, fulÂly conÂvinced by its ficÂtionÂal world.
Labyrinths, by Jorge Luis Borges. The ArgenÂtinÂian writer’s best-known colÂlecÂtion of stoÂries and essays requires patient rereadÂing. My first encounter with the book earÂly in colÂlege proÂvoked amazeÂment, but litÂtle comÂpreÂhenÂsion. I still can’t say that I underÂstand Borges, but every time I reread him, I seem to disÂcovÂer some new alcove, and someÂtimes a whole othÂer room, filled with inscrutable, mysÂteÂriÂous treaÂsures.
This list is not in any way comÂpreÂhenÂsive, but it covÂers a few of the books that have stayed with me, each of them for well over a decade, and a few of the reaÂsons why. What books do you reread, and why? What is it about them that keeps you returnÂing, and how did you disÂcovÂer these books? While I stuck with ficÂtion above, I could also make a list of philoÂsophÂiÂcal books, as well as poetÂry. Feel free to include such books in the comÂments secÂtion below as well.
AudiÂence memÂbers who had no familÂiarÂiÂty with the source mateÂrÂiÂal must’ve been very, very conÂfused. There’s a lot of bang for the buck, but title cards aside, not much in the way of conÂtext.
It’s conÂceivÂable that Jack Haley and Burt Lahr, the MGM version’s Tin WoodsÂman and CowÂardÂly Lion, might have been takÂen to see the 13 minute short as chilÂdren. (ScareÂcrow Ray BolÂger was a mere babe at the time of its release.)
Despite the presÂence of all the well-known charÂacÂters, includÂing two Totos, for my monÂey, the project’s true star is Hank, the scene stealÂing mule.
It’s unclear to me if the Wizard’s dark makeÂup is meant to be blackÂface. AccordÂing to Robin Bernstein’s Racial InnoÂcence: PerÂformÂing AmerÂiÂcan ChildÂhood from SlavÂery to CivÂil Rights, the stage play that inspired the film feaÂtured minÂstrel songs and popÂuÂlar blackÂface actors Fred A. Stone and David MontÂgomery as the ScareÂcrow and Tin WoodsÂman.
The film cast’s idenÂtiÂties have been lost to hisÂtoÂry, though a rumor perÂsists that the young actress playÂing Dorothy is freÂquent Harold Lloyd co-star, Bebe Daniels. The origÂiÂnal piano score is unknown, but likeÂly hewed closeÂly to Paul TietÂjens’ music from the play, which is what we hear in the online verÂsion.
Ayun HalÂlÂiÂday is an author, illusÂtraÂtor, and Chief PriÂmaÂtolÂoÂgist of the East VilÂlage Inky zine. She was shocked to find out how much her childÂhood Oz books are worth, but has thus far resistÂed partÂing with them. FolÂlow her @AyunHalliday
I am privÂiÂleged to have grown up in a house filled with books. I don’t rememÂber learnÂing to read; I simÂply recall books—those that felt beneath me, those that seemed forÂevÂer beyond comÂpreÂhenÂsion. No one taught me how to read—by which I mean no one told me what to attend to in books, what to ignore; what to love, what to scorn. The shelves in my home, school, and local library were a wilderÂness, and I was left to carve my own paths through their thickÂets.
That all changed when I got to colÂlege, then gradÂuÂate school, where I found varÂiÂous critÂiÂcal moveÂments, litÂerÂary theÂoÂries, and philoÂsophÂiÂcal schools, and was comÂpelled to choose between their methÂods, polÂiÂtics, and proÂhiÂbiÂtions. ReadÂing became a strenÂuÂous activÂiÂty, a heavy intelÂlecÂtuÂal exerÂcise in which I felt those critÂics and theÂoÂrists always lookÂing over my shoulÂder. Those who have done intenÂsive study in the humanÂiÂties may symÂpaÂthize: AfterÂward, I had to relearn how to read withÂout an agenÂda.
Such is the kind of unfetÂtered readÂing VirÂginia Woolf recÂomÂmends in an essay titled “How Should One Read a Book?”, pubÂlished in a series called The ComÂmon ReadÂer—a title, in fact, of two colÂlecÂtions, the first pubÂlished in 1925, the secÂond in 1932. Woolf wrote these essays for lay readÂers, not scholÂars, and many were preÂviÂousÂly pubÂlished in venues like The Nation, Vogue, and The Yale Review. In them, Woolf’s inforÂmal invesÂtiÂgaÂtions of writÂers like Jonathan Swift, Daniel Defoe, ChristiÂna RosÂsetÂti, and Thomas Hardy—writes a 1925 New York Times review—do not “put the author in the attiÂtude of a defendÂer or an exposÂiÂtor of cerÂtain trends in litÂerÂaÂture.”
“How Should One Read a Book?” appears at the end of the secÂond series of The ComÂmon ReadÂer. The essay “cauÂtions,” writes Maria PopoÂva, “against bringÂing bagÂgage and pre-conÂceived notions to your readÂing” and abjures a forÂmal, critÂiÂcal approach:
After all, what laws can be laid down about books? The batÂtle of WaterÂloo was cerÂtainÂly fought on a cerÂtain day; but is HamÂlet a betÂter play than Lear? Nobody can say. Each must decide that quesÂtion for himÂself. To admit authorÂiÂties, howÂevÂer heavÂiÂly furred and gowned, into our libraries and let them tell us how to read, what to read, what valÂue to place upon what we read, is to destroy the spirÂit of freeÂdom which is the breath of those sancÂtuÂarÂies. EveryÂwhere else we may be bound by laws and conÂvenÂtions — there we have none.
Though herÂself a more than able scholÂar and critÂic, Woolf does not recÂomÂmend that her readÂers become so. “The only advice,” she writes, “that one perÂson can give anothÂer about readÂing is to take no advice, to folÂlow your instincts, to use your own reaÂson, to come to your own conÂcluÂsions.” That said, howÂevÂer, she feels “at libÂerÂty to put forÂward a few ideas and sugÂgesÂtions” that we are free to take or leave. She offers her guideÂlines to aid enjoyÂment, not stiÂfle it, and to help us sort and sift the “mulÂtiÂtudiÂnous chaos” we encounter when conÂfrontÂed with genÂres, periÂods, and styles of every type.
“Where,” Woolf asks, “are we to begin?” Below, in brief, find a few of her “ideas and sugÂgesÂtions,” offered with all of the careÂful caveats above:
“Since books have classes—fiction, biogÂraÂphy, poetry—we should sepÂaÂrate them and take from each what it is right that each should give us.”
Most comÂmonÂly we come to books with blurred and dividÂed minds, askÂing of ficÂtion that it shall be true, of poetÂry that it shall be false, of biogÂraÂphy that it shall be flatÂterÂing, of hisÂtoÂry that it shall enforce our own prejÂuÂdices. If we could banÂish all such preÂconÂcepÂtions when we read, that would be an admirable beginÂning. Do not dicÂtate to your author; try to become him. Be his felÂlow-workÂer and accomÂplice. If you hang back, and reserve and critÂiÂcise at first, you are preÂventÂing yourÂself from getÂting the fullest posÂsiÂble valÂue from what you read.
“PerÂhaps the quickÂest way to underÂstand the eleÂments of what a novÂelÂist is doing is not to read, but to write; to make your own experÂiÂment with the danÂgers and difÂfiÂculÂties of words.”
Recall, then, some event that has left a disÂtinct impresÂsion on you — how at the corÂner of the street, perÂhaps, you passed two peoÂple talkÂing. A tree shook; an elecÂtric light danced; the tone of the talk was comÂic, but also tragÂic; a whole vision, an entire conÂcepÂtion, seemed conÂtained in that moment…. When you attempt to reconÂstruct it in words, you will find that it breaks into a thouÂsand conÂflictÂing impresÂsions…. Then turn from your blurred and litÂtered pages to the openÂing pages of some great novÂelÂist — Defoe, Jane Austen, Hardy. Now you will be betÂter able to appreÂciÂate their masÂtery.
“We can read [biograÂphies and memÂoirs] with anothÂer aim, not to throw light on litÂerÂaÂture, not to become familÂiar with famous peoÂple, but to refresh and exerÂcise our own creÂative powÂers.”
The greater part of any library is nothÂing but the record of… fleetÂing moments in the lives of men, women, and donÂkeys. Every litÂerÂaÂture, as it grows old, has its rubÂbish-heap, its record of vanÂished moments and forÂgotÂten lives told in falÂterÂing and feeÂble accents that have perÂished. But if you give yourÂself up to the delight of rubÂbish-readÂing you will be surÂprised, indeed you will be overÂcome, by the relics of human life that have been cast out to moulÂder. It may be one letÂter — but what a vision it gives! It may be a few senÂtences — but what visÂtas they sugÂgest!
Read the entireÂty of Woolf’s essay here to learn her nuanced view of readÂing. She conÂcludes her essay with anothÂer genÂtle swipe at litÂerÂary critÂiÂcism and recÂomÂmends humilÂiÂty in the comÂpaÂny of litÂerÂaÂture:
If to read a book as it should be read calls for the rarest qualÂiÂties of imagÂiÂnaÂtion, insight, and judgÂment, you may perÂhaps conÂclude that litÂerÂaÂture is a very comÂplex art and that it is unlikeÂly that we shall be able, even after a lifeÂtime of readÂing, to make any valuÂable conÂtriÂbuÂtion to its critÂiÂcism. We must remain readÂers.
ClearÂly Woolf did not think of readÂing as a pasÂsive activÂiÂty, but rather one in which we engage our own imagÂiÂnaÂtions and litÂerÂary abilÂiÂties, such as they are. But if we are not to critÂiÂcize, not draw firm conÂcluÂsions, morals, life lessons, or philosoÂphies from the books we read, of what use is readÂing to us?
Woolf answers the quesÂtion with some quesÂtions of her own: “Are there not some purÂsuits that we pracÂtice because they are good in themÂselves, and some pleaÂsures that are final? And is not this among them?”
FYI: BestÂselling author John Grisham is givÂing away his new novÂel called The Tumor: A Non-Legal Thriller. AvailÂable as a free ebook on AmaÂzon, Grisham has called The Tumor “the most imporÂtant book I’ve ever writÂten.” And, as the subÂtiÂtle sugÂgests, this new book isn’t anothÂer one of those legal thrillers Grisham is known for. No, this novÂel focusÂes on medÂiÂcine and how a “new medÂical techÂnolÂoÂgy could revÂoÂluÂtionÂize the future of medÂiÂcine by curÂing with sound.”
Here’s how the book is briefly sumÂmaÂrized on AmaÂzon:
The Tumor folÂlows the present day expeÂriÂence of the ficÂtionÂal patient Paul, an othÂerÂwise healthy 35-year-old father who is diagÂnosed with a maligÂnant brain tumor. Grisham takes readÂers through a detailed account of Paul’s treatÂment and his family’s expeÂriÂence that doesn’t end as we would hope. Grisham then explores an alterÂnate future, where Paul is diagÂnosed with the same brain tumor at the same age, but in the year 2025, when a treatÂment called focused ultraÂsound is able to extend his life expectanÂcy.
Focused ultraÂsound has the potenÂtial to treat not just brain tumors, but many othÂer disÂorÂders, includÂing Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, hyperÂtenÂsion, and prostate, breast and panÂcreÂatÂic canÂcer…
ReadÂers will get a taste of the narÂraÂtive they expect from Grisham, but this short book will also eduÂcate and inspire peoÂple to be hopeÂful about the future of medÂical innoÂvaÂtion.
You can also see Grisham talkÂing about the mateÂrÂiÂal in his novÂel at this TEDx talk.
If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newsletÂter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bunÂdled in one email, each day.
If you would like to supÂport the misÂsion of Open CulÂture, conÂsidÂer makÂing a donaÂtion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your conÂtriÂbuÂtions will help us conÂtinÂue proÂvidÂing the best free culÂturÂal and eduÂcaÂtionÂal mateÂriÂals to learnÂers everyÂwhere. You can conÂtribute through PayÂPal, PatreÂon, and VenÂmo (@openculture). Thanks!
A scroll through any colÂlecÂtion of conÂtemÂpoÂrary graphÂic design portÂfoÂlios makes for a dizzyÂing tour of the seemÂingÂly unlimÂitÂed range of colÂors, texÂtures, fonts, etc. availÂable to the modÂern comÂmerÂcial artist. From the most colÂorÂful pop art to the subÂtlest fine art, it seems that any and every vision can be realÂized on the page or screen thanks to digÂiÂtal techÂnolÂoÂgy. Turn the dial back over a hunÂdred years, and the posters, magÂaÂzine covÂers, and adverÂtiseÂments can seem primÂiÂtive by iniÂtial comÂparÂiÂson, someÂwhat washed out and aneÂmic, and cerÂtainÂly nothÂing like the canÂdy-colÂored visuÂal feast that meets our eyes on lapÂtop and smartÂphone screens these days.
But look closÂer at the design of a cenÂtuÂry past, and you’ll find, I think, just as much variÂety, skill, and imagination—if not nearÂly so much colÂor and slickness—as is on disÂplay today. And though softÂware enables designÂers to creÂate images and surÂfaces of which their preÂdeÂcesÂsors could only dream, those hand-illusÂtratÂed graphÂics of the past hold a strikÂingÂly simÂple allure that still comÂmands our attention—drawing from art nouÂveau, impresÂsionÂism, pre-Raphaelite, and othÂer fine art forms and incorÂpoÂratÂing modÂernist lines and conÂtrasts.
“The advent of the art poster in AmerÂiÂca,” writes NYPL, “is traceÂable to the pubÂliÂcaÂtion of Edward PenÂfieldÂ’s poster adverÂtisÂing the March 1893 issue of Harper’s. [See a colÂlecÂtion of his Harper’s posters here.] Unlike earÂliÂer adverÂtisÂing posters, PenÂfieldÂ’s work preÂsentÂed an implied graphÂic narÂraÂtive to which text was secÂondary. In this way, and subÂseÂquentÂly, in the hands of major artists such as PenÂfield, Will Bradley and Ethel Reed, the poster moved from the realm of comÂmerÂcial art to an eleÂvatÂed, artisÂtic posiÂtion.” These posters quickÂly became colÂlecÂtor’s items, and “became more desirÂable than the pubÂliÂcaÂtion they were adverÂtisÂing.”
As such, the turn-of-the-cenÂtuÂry art poster pushed the pubÂlishÂing indusÂtry toward graphÂiÂcalÂly illusÂtratÂed-magÂaÂzine covÂers and book jackÂets. The increasÂingÂly stylÂish, beauÂtiÂfulÂly-exeÂcutÂed posters on disÂplay in the NYPL archive show us not only the develÂopÂment of modÂern comÂmerÂcial design as adverÂtisÂing, but also its develÂopÂment as an art form. Though we may have needÂed Andy Warhol and his conÂtemÂpoÂraries to remind us that comÂmerÂcial art can just as well be fine art, a look through this stunÂning gallery of posters shows us that popÂuÂlar graphÂics and fine art often tradÂed places long before the pop art revÂoÂluÂtion.
We're hoping to rely on loyal readers, rather than erratic ads. Please click the Donate button and support Open Culture. You can use Paypal, Venmo, Patreon, even Crypto! We thank you!
Open Culture scours the web for the best educational media. We find the free courses and audio books you need, the language lessons & educational videos you want, and plenty of enlightenment in between.