Now that you've seen all of these examples of how fine art has been used in advertising, we must ask the question: So What?
The biggest takeaway is the fact that regardless of the reason for the fusion of the two disciplines, all of the previous examples require some knowledge on the part of the consumer. Michelangelo's gigantic sculpture of David in Levi's doesn't have the same effect if the viewer doesn't know that the sculpture is actually nude, or that David is revered for his physical form as being a "perfect male". Understanding that da Vinci's Mona Lisa is surrounded by people and tourists constantly during all hours which the Louvre is open adds to the effect of the joke in the Sony ad that claim she needs time off to sleep. Being familiar with either stories or scenes of the annunciation where in Chrisitian religions it is told that the Virgin Mary is made aware that she has been part of an emaculate conception helps the viewer to realize exactly how ridiculous it would be for a ancient Biblical figure to have used a modern pregnancy test. And furthermore, none of Dick Detzner's "Corporate Sacrilege" pieces would be anywhere near as shocking if people seeing them were not familiar with the scenes from religious art that he portrays OR the advertising mascots that he uses to populate them.
All of these examples of advertising and fine art melding are so much more powerful when viewers are "in on the joke". It would therefore appear that regardless of any other goals, such as social commentary, or breaking through advertising clutter, that artists and advertisers have for incorporating aspects of the other discipline, all of them assume a knowledgeable individual viewing them and understanding the nuance of the references.
The posts that follow are examples of advertising where fine art is used but where the medium in which the marketing is placed is what makes the pieces stand out and important.
