Paris Goes Pop

If you were a subject of an artwork by Andy Warhol from the '50s to the '80s, you had reached the pinnacle of celebrity; you were a symbol of your time. Many might argue (and many would cringe) at the idea of Paris Hilton being declared a 21st century icon. A couple of reality TV shows, a massive piggy bank, a limitless tan, prostitution-style publicity and zealous marketing is all she's needed to become an international household name, right?

Well, whatever the public thinks of Hilton, she has swamped our tabloids, department stores, televisions and stereos. This saturation begs the question: Would Paris have become Pop Art? Or would Warhol have overlooked her as just a pop tart?

Warhol was a celebrity himself and a man of contradictions. Some people described him as "death warmed over" because of his shy but scrutinizing personality. On top of that, he appeared emaciated with straw-like hair. He knew all about the fame game and hung out at the infamous Studio 54 nightclub.

Mass consumerism and popular culture were high on his agenda. He used imagery to visualise the American cultural identity, portraying people and objects that represented their era; the Campbell Soup can, Elizabeth Taylor, Elvis Presley and Vladimir Lenin. The longstanding question is: Did he choose his subjects or did his subjects choose him?

His screenprints of Marilyn Monroe speak volumes about the enormous influence she had on popular culture. She is etched into people's minds as a multi-coloured face with different tones of make-up. Her legend remains as a sex symbol, immortalising the notion that blondes do have more fun. Monroe's show reel includes Gentlemen Prefer Blondes and Some Like It Hot. Known for her comedic skills and hypnotic screen presence, her fame has surpassed her death, remaining legendary today.

In comes Hilton. She is arguably the modern day Monroe. Both are seemingly carefree blondes, but in reality they are in careful control of their public persona. However, Hilton's rise to fame makes her different from other celebrities.

Her persistent appearances at Hollywood parties and events launched her into the media spotlight.

The defining difference for Hilton is that she has brought about a new kind of fame; one that does not require much more than sufficient media attention. The press makes her famous and the public keeps her famous.

Her fame speaks of a generational shift in today's culture. It's no longer about the talent you possess; it's the media you can spin.

Some argue that the effects of popular culture have "dumbed us down". Celebrities like Hilton represent the disposable element of modern society. A society fixated on the sensational, the fickle and the superficial.

But Alan McKee, Associate Professor in Film and Television at the Queensland University of Technology, says that accusations of a society turned dumb are inaccurate.

"Psychologists have found that every year people are getting smarter. We are actually better off living in the 21st century," he says.

McKee argues that when it comes to celebrities, not much has changed either.

"Being famous for being famous has had a long standing tradition in Hollywood. People say it's changed, but that's bollocks," he says.

"There have been stars since the 1950s who have become famous for the same reasons Paris Hilton has."

While Hilton certainly has her own admirers, nothing quite compares to the Monroe-Warhol relationship. Monroe was always the subject of Warhol's fascination and their talents merged to make art history a unique fusion Hilton will never be able to repeat.