Comments on: The U.S. Postal Service Revisions the History of Smoking

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:27:32 +0000

“France gives back pipe to Jacques Tati and cigarette back to existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre”
Read more:
http://bit.ly/fVftYX

Source: The Daily Telegraph (Australia)

By: katerina

katerina — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:49:42 +0000

There was actually a lot of fuss in Hyde Park, NY over the silhouette of FDR at the town border signage. They wanted to make that image into the town seal, and some opposed the image with the cigarette holder. Without the cigarette holder, you wouldn’t really know who it was a silhouette of. I come from that area and associate the town with that image, so naturally would make a good and recognizable official seal.
An article about it:
http://www.jstor.org/pss/20207232

The image:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_oUjmZeacI3I/TF8FdPUVlzI/AAAAAAAADWU/gDvCRSWnGqg/s1600/fdr-welcome.jpg

It’s used all over town:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_oUjmZeacI3I/TF8FMi84sOI/AAAAAAAADVs/eJ18Y8FDpVw/s1600/fdr-circle.jpg

In researching this post, I found several images of FDR without his cigarette, but as a silhouette, I still feel like the cigarette really makes it recognizable. I don’t feel that way about the cigarettes in the stamps. Maybe I hadn’t memorized the images of Jackson Pollack or Robert Johnson – I recognize Jackson Pollack in that image more for his posture, but extra clues in the background image of his style of painting. Don’t know Robert Johnson at all. If his cigarette is that important to recognize him, it might stay in; alternately, they have his name, which they probably would have added to the stamp anyway as it commemorates him specifically – you can’t depend on the American public to recognize an illustration of a person, I really don’t think. If they commemorate someone, they put the name on anyway. As good as artists might be, I don’t think the illustrations give enough likeness to the photos to demand a realistic portrayal like a cigarette. It’s something of an honor to be portrayed on a stamp, but I think starting with an illustration at all, they are free to “interpret” or consolidate a lot of information in it, fictionalize it a little bit because it’s not accurate to begin with.

What I found interesting is that the background for the photo of Robert Johnson is a sheet like you might have your portrait taken, while the illustration places him in front of a shingled house or cabin. The fictional background, I suppose, adds a little interest to the picture, but just seems random to me.

By: b

Tue, 18 Jan 2011 19:27:04 +0000

I tend to agree with this. Do they know for sure the color the suspenders and guitar neck in the black and white photo? Likely not, but if they made them the wrong color it’s not exactly misrepresenting the person. In today’s society, a prominently-placed cigarette (especially in that second photo) would probably steal the publicity and cause people to ignore the fact that it’s supposed to be a tribute to this particular person.

There are probably other celebrities or historical figures who were better-known specifically as smokers, for whom leaving a cigarette in the image wouldn’t cause such a stir simply because people already associate it with that personality. A picture of FDR with his cigarette holder probably wouldn’t cause a fuss, and taking it out of an image might actually piss people off.

By: Mike Perazzetti

Mike Perazzetti — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 23:11:36 +0000

In the case of Robert Johnson, at least in the Rock ‘N’ Roll canon, he is pretty well known, but probably not by the less than musically fanatical. However, in regards to the expression on his face, Johnson was notoriously shy, even going so far as to record all of his twenty-nine sides with his back turned away from the recordist. He probably didn’t like his photo taken. Additionally, it’s not his photo that is as iconic as his music, but they had to use something, given that there are few photos that were actually taken of him.

By: No al tabaco, ni en los sellos (Ing)

No al tabaco, ni en los sellos (Ing) — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 10:46:34 +0000

[…] No al tabaco, ni en los sellos (Ing) thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/01/14/smokescreen-the-… por Lordo hace 2 segundos […]

By: Syd

Syd — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 02:41:54 +0000

Meh. They’re drawings/paintings OF the pictures. Had they shopped the cigarettes out of the actual pictures that would be obnoxious, but notice that isn’t the only thing different. In both pictures, the background is different (in Pollack’s, the windows and other trappings of the room are replaced with a background reminiscent of his paintings; in Johnson’s, the fabric background is replaced with a wood panel wall), Johnson’s face and hand are in slightly different positions, and of course, both are in color! I don’t think removing the cigarette is going to misrepresent them or history; they’re historically known for painting and for blues music, respectively. Smoking was just something EVERY adult did at that time, their important and unique historical impacts haven’t been erased or altered. And anyway, they’re STAMPS. Was this a history book, sure, but does anyone pay much attention to stamps like that? I really don’t see the point of removing the cigarette for the exact reason (kids don’t think smoking is cool because someone on a stamp does it), but either way, I feel it’s not an issue.

By: katerina

katerina — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 01:33:52 +0000

I don’t think anyone is learning history from looking at a stamp. If they are looking at it, they are collectors and they might be interested in certain people, if you are buying only specific stamps because you are a fan, or you are taking whatever they give you at the post office. I know some people collect stamps, and some people still mail their bill payments, and sure, a birthday card here or there and not even look at the stamp. Usually I’m not given much of a choice, but I can buy a book of stamps and the cost of a stamp will increase twice before I use them all. It’s hard to get too excited whether they have a cigarette in their mouth or not.

By: T

Fri, 14 Jan 2011 22:25:30 +0000

I’m getting worked up about these stamps all of a sudden becoming examples of blatant racism and ‘re-writing’ of history… jeesh.

By: Zula

Zula — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 22:08:48 +0000

You’re getting awfully worked up over a bunch of stamps, jeesh.

By: Bagelsan

Bagelsan — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 21:35:11 +0000

I think some of that is how his right eyebrow is raised a little more, too, in the stamp version. I don’t think that removing the cigarette hurts the image; I just don’t think it’s a very good painting of him in general (see the lipstick comments above!)

By: lolo

lolo — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 21:33:31 +0000

In classes I’ve taken it was mentioned that Pollack would throw his cigarette butts onto the canvas and paint over them, integrating them into his work. I would say smoking was a part of his identity. Let’s just photoshop ourselves a prettier history though…history doesn’t REALLY matter.

By: maevele

maevele — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 20:57:46 +0000

I’m more concerned by how there is a subtle expression difference on Robert Johnson’s stamp. Once they took the smoke out of his mouth, it looks as though he is sneering.

By: T

Fri, 14 Jan 2011 20:52:35 +0000

From that same stamp website, “On September 17, 1994, the USPS issued a set of eight stamps honoring ten different Jazz and Blues Musicians.”

10 PEOPLE.

By: T

Fri, 14 Jan 2011 20:50:02 +0000

If you look… the stamps have different purposes. Let’s make something out of nothing! Wooo Hooo!

— The Pollock stamp was to show “Abstract Expressionism”

According to a stamp website, “On February 18, 1999, the USPS issued a stamp depicting Jackson Pollock to commemorate the art movement Abstract Expressionism. This event was one of fifteen chosen to represent the decade of the 1940’s.”

It wasn’t about the PERSON. It’s a stamp about an art movement!!!! Pollock was chosen to *exemplify* this aspect of the 1940s. They chose Pollock out of the several major artists of this style probably because he’s the best known.

This is UNLIKE the Robert Johnson stamp. THAT stamp is about the PERSON.

Uggh!

By: ellipsisknits

ellipsisknits — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 20:27:11 +0000

Both individuals are famous for their work, not their faces.

Pollack’s work is visible in the stamp. That should be sufficient to identify him – perhaps even more effectively than his name.

While Johnson is pictured with a guitar (or some stringed instrument – it might well be a banjo or a lute from what is shown), that is hardly enough context to recognize his work. It is very hard to print music on a stamp, so his name is a second-best identifier.