People love March Madness, especially the early round matchups. No, not the weird fake first round of four play-in games, but the real first round played on Thursday and Friday where there are upsets and everyone has a chance, not only in the tournament but also in life.

For March Madness brings us springtime every year, the renewal of life like birthing a kid (if you are human or caprine) or a calf (if you’re more into the bovine side of genetic makeup).

And with six rounds of games ahead, we are all young again with our whole lives ahead of us.

At least until the Final Four ends. We die sometime after that. Or at least get closer to death (citation: aging).

With all of that excitement and optimism surrounding March Madness, can you imagine if the Andy Warhol Bridge matched up against the Hot Metal Bridge in the first round of the Pittsburgh Bridge March Madness Bracket? Can you imagine the television ratings and the actions on the sportsbooks?

It is indeed hard to imagine, because it would never happen.

Not because a Pittsburgh Bridge March Madness Bracket wouldn’t happen. It should. But because these two great Bridges would be seeded too high* for such an important matchup to happen so early on in the bracket. #SelectionCommitteeResponsibilityTowardsFairAndEthicalSeedingPractices

They would meet up in the Elite 8 to decide who is going to the Final Four (a cheap term that tries to mean Mount Rushmore) of the best.

And imagine if college basketball didn’t play the Final Four, if getting to the Final Four were the end, just as we don’t play the Mount Rushmore (how could you play a Mount Rushmore any way? That doesn’t even make sense), then such Elite 8 matchups would be so much bigger and so much more important–-so important that they may require us to write about them just as we are required (not by the boring law of governments, but by the more interesting law of what’s sweetly necessary) to write about the great Andy Warhol Bridge versus Hot Metal Bridge matchup here.

It is a matchup for the ages (citation: above subtitle), mostly the older ages of Pittsburgh Bridge Connoisseurs of Old, or younger generations who can only afford the very best old, cheap whisky to drink while patronizing such electrifying competitions.

First we must pacify the growing anger of the Pittsburgh Bridge Connoisseurs of Old who will worry this competition may be an anti-Andy Warhol Bridge rant, which it is not. So we must illustrate, with words rather than pictures of Campbell Soup, that the Andy Warhol Bridge is indeed a great Bridge, the finest of bridges**.

The Andy Warhol Bridge leads us to the world of Modern Art, Contemporary Art, Pop Art–-whatever it may be most appropriately called. Here at Sweet Livin’ Productions, we do love art (citation: Mount Rushmores) and creativity.

But even for our cutting edge, perceptive, advant-garde, humbly open-minded minds, delving into the Andy Warhol world can be a confusing and winding place that can cause navigational issues full of surprises.

Let’s see where the Andy Warhol Bridge leads us.

He is certainly best known for the Campbell Soup Cans and the Marilyn Monroe Busts. They have become a staple in pop culture, seen around the world. This must be acknowledged.

It should be appreciated. Even if not understood.

When a pop song, for instance, spreads across the globe, many music connoisseurs and musicians may look at it with pedantic ire accompanied or embodied in body language or actual words suggesting or clearly stating they “could have done that,” and the “hoi polloi, that general public, is so stupid” for liking it so much.

These silly insufferables are the same people who laugh at hoi polloi models, skipping right over them and only paying attention to what supermodels wear.

But rather than*** sneering at pop songs or proletariat sexiness we won’t like or may be intimidated by, we can appreciate there might be something good about them if so many people like them, while also recognizing that mobs can be incorrect (citation: Salem, Mass, 1600s; New England & Brady, 2000s).

With all this in mind, we should appreciate Warhol’s classic images; we don’t have to “get them.”

Though if we did “get them,” maybe his Bridge would have been on The Mount Rushmore of Pittsburgh Bridges. So I suppose we did need to get them of Andy Warhol and his Bridge wanted to reach the pinnacle of internet success, marked by being on the original Mount Rushmore of Pittsburgh Bridges.

Essentially, Andy Warhol wanted (citation: Warhol, Andy) his art to be inclusive. This knowledgeable art person explains it much better than we could.

But then the question arises “Is Warhol’s message really for the general public or just the elite few like us who have read the above blog–-or at the very least posted a link to it on their website after reading the title and some of the other words?”

Seriously though, until we read that blog, we did not get that message. Sure it makes sense after the explanation, but that was not immediately conveyed to us through the art itself.

But neither is the immediate message in popular songs, at least to most of us here. We may enjoy the aesthetics, the pleasurable sound of the song first, and worry about any message later.

Similarly, when we look at a Regular Sweet Livin’ Model and suddenly get regular sexual desires, we may not understand exactly how that happened, until we take a look deeper beyond the superficial.

So, with that in mind, how pleasurable is the aesthetics of a painted Campbell Soup Can?

Opinions may vary.

But, does art need to even be pleasurable?

While that is a difficult question to answer, we say “No, but…”

The “but” being followed by “but really we prefer to consume art that is mostly consumable.”

i.e. enjoyable.

For instance, Waiting for Godot is a very artful play–-indeed a great play (let’s not talk of other Mount Rushmores just yet, but certainly it would be in the conversation). But is it really enjoyable? Is it pleasurable?

Not really. Unless you love uncomfortable waiting and would rather stand in the Disney lines than ride the rides.

We do admit that not all art needs to be enjoyable; however, the great majority of art that we prefer to consume is enjoyable.

Certainly the definitions of what “art” is or what “art” should be could go on and on. And does in more boring discourse that atypical on this sweet and ever-interesting internet.

And so too could the questions of “pop art,” especially in Andy Warhol’s case: is his art really indeed for the masses?

His most popular pieces have been widely circulated and consumed, but how much of that is marketing itself, a type of metacommentary outside of the specific art piece? And is the message, as well-articulated in the above blog, truly evident in the pieces.?

In other words, the masses, including us, can certainly discern the Campbell Soup Can (in the sense of literal identification: it is indeed obviously a Campbell Soup Can) without metacommentary or Marilyn Monroe (that is indeed her and not Joe Pesci). So yes, popular symbols or images are easily transmitted to the masses; but is the art in whole easily accessible to the masses or are parts of its message still exclusive to those who have the available commentary or outside explanation?

But then if pop art needs to uphold all these standards, is such a thing really possible?

I think so. While certain songs may be popular without most listeners delving into the textured meanings, some have quite clear meanings, like Jimmy Buffett’s “Margaritaville” or 2Pac’s “Dear Mama” or 2Pac’s “Hit ‘Em Up,” or 2Pac’s “Brenda’s Got a Baby” or many other songs featured on 2Pac Fridays.

But 2Pac has many songs that have textured meanings, which usually were not readily singles, i.e. less popular—but still correctly featured on 2Pac Fridays.

But there are many pop songs who are enjoyed by many but meanings may be thoroughly explored by fewer than have enjoyed them, like Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven” or Sting’s “Every Breath You Take (I’ll Be Watching You)”--a popular wedding song, but written as more of a stalker-friendly rock anthem.

Many songs have a clear meaning, but we don’t know who they’re about outside of the song itself. Such is true about Carly Simon’s “You’re So Vain” and Alanis Morrissette’s “You Oughta Know.” Both were smash hits with obvious messages, but the inspirations for the songs became mysteries shrouded in secrecy that sparked conversations, conspiracies, etc. and thus helped thrust the songs into another stratosphere of popularity.

Yet, as it is fine enough to simply love a song whether or not the meaning is clear to you or not, do any of these above distinctions matter?

Maybe, maybe not.

But that seems to be the reply when you ask the question about Andy Warhol’s art, ”Do you like it?”

Maybe, maybe not.

Or:

I don’t know.

Sometimes the verbal reply is accompanied by a shoulder shrug.

Or maybe not.

But a staunch Andy Warhol supporter could reasonably say that we have not thoroughly enough understood or discussed his art here. And that is true enough. Certainly we are not experts.

But that is precisely the point, we believe. To enjoy the popular art one need not be an expert.

And so the “I don’t know”s not only of us, but of the popular masses, is ultimately what gave the Hot Metal Bridge an early lead in this matchup.

But the Andy Warhol Bridge made a comeback—-indeed, one for the ages (which helped in truly making this “a competition for the ages”). #Truth #Accuracy #Diction

And it was not with his Campbell Soup or Marilyn Monroe’s or even his The Factory, though it is closely related to that.

It was two other things:

1. Repetition and attrition (two things, we supposed, but paired here as one thing for organizational considerations). The Andy Warhol Bridge never quit. Andy Warhol himself was very pro-repetition (citation: his art; this statement: “The more you look at the same exact thing, the more the meaning goes away, and the better and emptier you feel.") While we do not fully agree with that statement as we are more pro-positivity on this sweet internet, we appreciate his pro-repetition stance because we like to be repetitive ourselves here at Sweet Livin’ Productions and Warhol has provided as the artful justification to do so (though we would have—and did—anyway). But that repetition only allowed the Andy Warhol Bridge to stay in the game for a surprising “bench player” of sorts to make a huge, unexpected splash in this elite Elite 8 competition of Bridges that got the Andy Warhol Bridge right back in the game.

2. That player's name: 15 Minutes of Fame.

   This popular expression may even be more popular and popularly understood than his art.

   It is used all the time–-and to have coined such a popular expression would be quite a feat: beyond elite (and thus beyond the Elite 8 in this great competition).

   Andy Warhol may have coined that expression.

   But he may have not.

   And so it was this 15 Minutes of Fame that rallied the Andy Warhol Bridge back into the game against the Hot Metal Bridge, eventually extending the game into overtime.

   But 15 Minutes of Fame could only play 15 minutes, perhaps fouling out or maybe due to a medical condition****, and was not available for overtime, where the Hot Metal Bridge, to its credit, did not let the momentum of the Andy Warhol Bridge’s last 15 minutes of regulation carry into overtime when the Hot Metal Bridge retook control with its molten resolve and won a by decent amount that screwed the gamblers who had take the Andy Warhol Bridge plus the points (the Hot Metal Bridge had been favored by Vegas) in correctly predicting a close game (tied at the end of regulation) but widening in the extra time with 15 Minutes of Fame running out and the strategic fouling by the Andy Warhol Bridge to try to extend the time further only further widening the final score and the debts of habitual bridge gamblers.

   Conclusion

   In the end, 15 Minutes of Fame’s origin is another “maybe” in the Andy Warhol Bridge’s corner, another “I don’t know” that ultimately hurt the Andy Warhol Bridge in this competition as a little give and sway in bridges may be part of the engineering plan, but too much waffling and wobbling can lead to disaster.

   In reflective Great Bridge engineering speculation, some analysts speculate had the term been 20 Minutes of Fame instead of the mathematical lesser 15, it would have been enough for the Andy Warhol Bridge to carry the-end-of-regulation success into overtime and complete the historic comeback and slight upset.

   But too much uncertainty. Too much speculation.

   That’s ultimately what lost the Andy Warhol Bridge’s Elite 8 Matchup and spot on the prestigious Mount Rushmore of Pittsburgh Bridges.

   There is too much ambiguity surrounding the Andy Warhol Bridge, some mental work that needs to be done to traverse, which does not need to be done for the four Bridges on the Mount Rushmore of PIttsburgh Bridges, most specifically with its Elite 8 competition–-the Hot Metal Bridge.

   We know where the Hot Metal Bridge stands: the same place since 1887.

   But not only that, we know what it stands for: the transport of hot metal.

   Therefore, all of your hottest metal bands, all have their roots in the Hot Metal Bridge. To credit the Hot Metal Bridge as a predecessor responsibility for the success of Megadeth, Metallica, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, etc. may seem like a stretch to many, but then consider how the Bridge stretches over the Monongahela River and how modern art/contemporary art/pop art makes many “stretches” itself. So one may view the Hot Metal Bridge as using the Andy Warhol Bridge’s game against itself: sometimes are greatest strengths are our greatest weaknesses.

   The Hot Metal Bridge proved to be an especially difficult Elite 8 matchup for the Andy Warhol Bridge, who would have benefitted from an upset in its region that it never got.

   But those are the breaks (citation: Flow, Kurtis).

   And those breaks lead to a perfect balance for us all.

So there you have it: ”A Competition for the Ages.” As you can see, it was a fair fight with good sportsmanship.

*Unless one of them had an historically bad season. But this would still make a first-round matchup extremely unlikely as both come from Great Bridge Power Conferences and thus if one had a bad season it more likely simply not get a nod from the Great Bridge Tournament Selection Committee, rather than get a lower seed, which would go to automatic qualifiers from smaller bridge conferences.

**well, not the top 4 in finest, to be sure, but the top 8, actually, which was revealed through this Bridge Madness Competition, an unusually kind act that others barely left off of other Mount Rushmores do not have the privilege of as those outside of the top 4 of any other category known to humankind outside of Pittsburgh Bridges normally experience a long, precipitous drop from down the mountain from the peak of Mount Rushmore fame to the obscurity of the mountain base.

***Or maybe “in addition to” for the sake of balance.

****No one knows for sure, as the anti-Great Bridge crowd evidently destroyed all box scores and recaps of this competition for the ages and what you read now is mostly a recreation never before seen in engineering history.