Who knew standing around looking at art all afternoon could be so tiring?
So, in case you haven't been following the news, out here on the East Coast (and apparently Chicago, too), it has been freakishly hot. All the time. To the tune of, it will still be 88 degrees F at 10:00pm. Today, it probably was hitting near 100 degrees F. I knew this in advance, so made the executive decision to have an "indoor" day today. And by "indoor," I mean "indoor" with lots and lots of air conditioning.
As is par for the course on the weekends, I got a late start-- around 11am. This was made later by the fact that I had to make an unplanned trip to the Apple store in SoHo, because last night to my delight I found that my Mac charger had completely crapped out and I had to get a new one. All I have to say is, thank god for Apple Care extended warranty. Saved me $70 on a new charger. The trip to the Apple store did start the day off on a weird note: the guy behind the counter remembered me from four years ago. Apparently, this guy had briefly been in my freshman year French class, before he dropped the class. But I guess he remembered me, because apparently when we had talked at some point during French, it came out that we were both from the San Francisco Bay Area, and we both worked out at the same health club, Courtside. So, it's a small world after all. What are the odds? Shoutout to RB at the SoHo Apple store: I am dutifully impressed with the longevity of your memory, because I definitely did not remember this at all. But then, my memory is sort of like that blue fish in Finding Nemo. So... that happened.
So, to escape the heat, I spent most of the afternoon in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, aka the MoMA. Throughout my art history studies (and really, before that due just to its aesthetic qualities), aside from ancient art and society, I have always found modern art, from post-impressionism onwards, to be very compelling, and so much more interesting than a lot of the artistic styles that came before it. So I was really excited to go to the preeminent museum in America for modern and contemporary art. And, even though I was only able to be there for three hours, I got to see a surprising amount. I didn't get to see the photography section, or any of the special exhibits. And I didn't go to the fourth floor, which houses modern art from post-impressionism until roughly the World War II period. Since I have seen a lot of works from those eras, I wanted to see more pieces from the mid-20th century onwards, as I feel like these periods are kind of given the shaft in a lot of major museums that have to house artworks representing the span of centuries. So, I had not been exposed to them as much.
It definitely challenged my conception of what can be called art. As an art history major, and as someone who likes and appreciates modern art for what it tries to do in each of its manifestations, I feel that I am fairly liberal and open-minded when it comes to seeing the artistic and creative value of a work that at first glance may not seem "artsy" enough. But even I think that some of the stuff was really pushing it. There was one piece that was literally a bag of cat litter propped up against the wall. I understand that it may have been trying to make a statement about the line between everyday objects and "art," and perhaps trying to study how an object's placement in say, a gallery, versus a home, changes how we view things as being or not "art." I get that. The problem is, it's already been done. It's not an original idea, it is not exposing a question not already asked. If you need proof, I refer you to R. Mutt's (a pseudonym) Fountain-- you know, that ceramic urinal that was entered into an art show as a sculpture. That is almost 100 years old. That's why I think a lot of the more contemporary stuff that was shown, was bordering on (or crossed into) non-art: the creation of the pieces didn't require "talent" as we traditionally think of it to "do" art, and this lack of "technical" value to the art was not made up for by some new question or angle to explore. A lot of it seemed re-hashed ideas from 50 years ago.
I sometimes wonder where "art" and visual culture as a discipline and practice is these days. It seems that for a long time-- certainly in the 20th century-- there were defined "movements" of artistic production, or "styles" such as abstract expressionism, or Cubism, or Surrealism. And it wasn't so much a name given to these groups after-the-fact, by historians. Rather, their members seemed self-conscious and purposeful in this creation of new styles. I don't see that as much in contemporary art. It seems a lot more to be, a lot of people doing their own thing. I sometimes do wonder what this means for the evolution of art production going forward. One area that does seem promising, is video/audio art. Of all the contemporary art from the last twenty years, the most compelling pieces were those that used video and/or sound; although, in some ways, those videos without sound-- just moving image-- were more effective and provocative. Perhaps this is where art is moving-- off of the canvas and onto the screen. Which is not surprising given how much our society is now plugged into little screens. Although, I do wonder if we won't lose something by having advancement in visual production take place digitally, rather than on a tactile, 3D surface.
After visiting the MoMA, I went and did the other thing that is quintessentially "New York," at least if you are a tourist. I went to the Empire State Building, to go to the observatory. Now, aside from the observatory, just getting up top is an experience in and of itself. They have all these roped-off lines that snake you through the 80th floor, where all the ticket offices are located. Not only do they have the ticket booth and airport-like security, but as you snake back and forth, for several minutes, you are treated to a mini-exhibit on the creation of, and pop-cultural significance surrounding, the Empire State Building. Then, as you continue to make your way through the perfect specimen of Art Deco design, you get your picture taken against a green screen, upon which they will project the background of the building and Manhattan. It's kind of like being in a line a Disneyland.
I got up the 86th floor, which is where the main observatory deck is located. I have to say that the view is stunning. It was a little hazy today, so the views weren't as clear as they could have been, but nonetheless impressive. The weird thing was, though, that I didn't feel like I was up all that high. Maybe it was from all the hype, but I expected to feel way more airborne than I did. And I do know that I was, in fact, significantly above street level, but it didn't feel that way. And ditto when I went up to the 102nd floor, where they have a mini-observatory (for an extra fee, of course), the "highest in Manhattan." Maybe it was just me, but I didn't feel like super-ridiculously-high, even though I don't think I have ever been as high as 102 floors in any other building. Anyway, below are some pictures of the view from the 86th floor, as well as one from the main entrance. Enjoy!
After the Empire State building trip, I headed to dinner, and back to uptown, so I could see my boyfriend's-- and and this point, really, my friend-- perform at this place on 53rd St and 2nd Ave in Manhattan, called Tomi Jazz. Allegra is someone my boyfriend has known for a long time, and I finally got to meet her when I got to New York, as she has been living her since graduating New England Conservatory. She is a jazz singer, and quite talented. It was a nice, low-key venue, and sitting for a couple hours while listening to some mellow, pleasant music was just the perfect end to a hot day during which I spent most of my time on my feet. If you are interested in good music (which you should be), the following link is for her website: http://allegralevy.com. Below is a snapshot I took of the sign board outside the venue, advertising her gig for the evening. I am also adding her website to the list of permanent external links that I keep on this blog.
And finally, even though it is not at all related to anything I have discussed in this post, I am including an adorable video of "Panda Dogs." I am not going to try to explain it here; the website http://www.pandadog.org/ explains it better than I ever could.
No comments:
Post a Comment