Campbell’s Soup Cans I: Onion 47

Catalog Title: Campbell's Soup Cans I: Onion (FS II.47)

Year: 1968

Size: 35" x 23" | 88.9 x 58.4 cm.

Medium: Portfolio of ten screenprints on paper.

Edition: Edition of 250 signed in ball-point pen and numbered with a rubber stamp on verso. There are 26 AP signed and lettered A - Z in ball-point pen on verso.

Name(Required)

Phone #(Required)

This field is hidden when viewing the form

Artwork

This field is hidden when viewing the form

Name

Name(Required)

Email(Required)

This field is hidden when viewing the form

Artwork

This field is hidden when viewing the form

Gallery Phone #

Campbell’s Soup Cans I: Onion 47 by Andy Warhol is one of ten prints in his Campbell’s Soup Cans I portfolio from 1968. The print depicts a can of Campbell’s Condensed Onion Soup, labeled “Made with Beef Stock.” Warhol used flat fields of red and white with clean, black outlines, faithfully reproducing the look of the real Campbell’s can. The gold medallion and simple typography reflect the precision of advertising design. Through this minimal composition, Warhol transforms an everyday grocery item into a timeless Pop Art icon.

From Painting to Screenprinting

After painting the original 32 Campbell’s Soup Cans in 1962, Warhol returned to the subject six years later using his new screenprinting method. This technique allowed him to achieve identical reproductions with mechanical accuracy, further emphasizing his theme of mass production as art. One year later, he published Campbell’s Soup Cans II, which introduced additional flavors and small graphic variations. Together, the Campbell’s Soup Cans I and II portfolios remain among Warhol’s most recognizable and valuable works, bridging commercial imagery and fine art.

Public Reaction and the Rise of Pop Art

Since their conception, Warhol’s soup cans have sparked debate over their artistic merit. When they debuted in 1962, many critics dismissed them as simple copies of mass-market goods. The works directly opposed the dominant trends of Abstract Expressionism, which prized emotion and individuality. Viewers accustomed to painterly gestures and expressive brushwork struggled with Warhol’s mechanical precision. Nevertheless, the exhibition was a success and played a key role in establishing the Pop Art movement. By using a mundane product as his subject, Warhol expanded the very definition of art.

At the time, Abstract Expressionism was still regarded as the pinnacle of high art. Its themes of human struggle, nature, and emotion dominated the critical discourse. In contrast, Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup Cans I: Onion 47 and its companion prints rejected these conventions. They replaced emotional expression with cool detachment and embraced the visual language of advertising. In doing so, Warhol shifted attention toward the aesthetics of mass culture and the products of everyday life.

Warhol’s Inspiration in Everyday Life

Warhol drew inspiration not from nature or mythology but from the world of commerce and modern industry. He admired the consistency and familiarity of products like Coke, perfume, and Campbell’s Soup. To him, these items reflected twentieth-century life more truthfully than traditional art subjects. He appreciated capitalism’s equality: everyone, rich or poor, could enjoy the same can of soup. Consequently, Warhol viewed consumer goods as valid sources of artistic beauty—symbols of a shared modern experience.

Prints like Campbell’s Soup Cans I: Onion 47 also function as experiments in context. Warhol took an image seen daily in advertisements or supermarkets and presented it within the refined setting of a gallery. The shift in environment changed its meaning. Consequently, the can ceased to be a commercial object and became something worthy of contemplation. Much of the work’s value lies in this conceptual transformation. In effect, Warhol asked viewers to reconsider what is authentic in culture and to recognize art in the familiar. His presentation invites audiences to observe ordinary commodities anew, questioning why such things should not be considered art.