Elizabeth Scripturient (the delinquent, ecumenical (hermionesviolin) wrote,
Elizabeth Scripturient (the delinquent, ecumenical
hermionesviolin

I need to trust my sense of direction less.

I exited Ruggles at a different place than i usually do, and when i got to where the roads take a perpendicular, i thought i knew which way to go, but i didn’t. I was on Tremont and Shawmut and thought since these are major streets eventually i should be somewhere where i would know where i was, but no. I was very much in a residential area, houses and convenience stores, and i knew that wasn’t where i wanted to be. At one point i got back in view of Northeastern and thought i could orient myself from there, but of course because Northeastern is so big you’re not necessarily orienting yourself in relation to what you think you are, so i continued to get lost, and then i couldn’t even get back to Northeastern. I had gotten in to Ruggles at 3:15 and we had 4:00 tickets and my mom was waiting for me at the MFA. 3:45 i got back to the vicinity of Ruggles and i finally asked someone for directions and he pointed down a street and told me to go straight for a few blocks until i got to Huntington Ave. And of course once i got to Huntington i could see the museum and it was fine and i got there at five minutes of.

Impressions of Light: The French Landscape from Corot to Monet wasn’t all that great. I want the Monet and his ilk, the pretty light and colors. There were a lot of etchings and other stuff (though some of the photographs were lovely, and i’m impressed at what good condition they’re in 150 years later). Eventually we walked into a room entitled “The Impressionist Revolution,” and the entire facing wall was Monet, and i thought, “Okay, i’m home now,” because i love the Impressionists and i feel really comfortable around them.

We checked out Traveling Scholars 2002. This was, um, interesting. A lot of modern art i just don’t get, even with informational booklets.
  • I was more impressed by Nuno de Campos’s Lap series once i realized they were paintings not photographs, but i still didn’t get the point.
    These laps of influential warmth reject the category of objectual torso. They confront the viewer with a fictional space of inter subjectivity in which projection and perception—expectations and reality—seldom coincide. The lap is portrayed as a site of mutual domination and dependency. It materializes the intimate slippage of objectificarion from adoration, which characterizes the act of painting itself.
    Isn’t there a problem if i need the artist’s explanation to care? I mean, i love knowing what the artist is thinking, but shouldn’t the viewer be able to “get it” just viewing the painting? This is begging for a long and tortured analysis of what makes art -- is it pretty? does it make people think? who gets to decide what is art? - and i am so not going there.
  • Adrian Carroll was even worse. Visual fragments and stuff. I’m always asking when viewing stuff like this, “How can i be cool enough that i can do this kinda stuff and have it called art and displayed in a major museum? ”
  • Heidi Johnson, on the opposite wall, was full of color, and there were detailed insects and flowers and i could get behind that as art.
  • The Cree Bruins exhibit was cool -- read
[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<a href-http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/arts/art/documents/02749950.asp>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

I exited Ruggles at a different place than i usually do, and when i got to where the roads take a perpendicular, i thought i knew which way to go, but i didn’t. I was on Tremont and Shawmut and thought since these are major streets eventually i should be somewhere where i would know where i was, but no. I was very much in a residential area, houses and convenience stores, and i knew that wasn’t where i wanted to be. At one point i got back in view of Northeastern and thought i could orient myself from there, but of course because Northeastern is so big you’re not necessarily orienting yourself in relation to what you think you are, so i continued to get lost, and then i couldn’t even get back to Northeastern. I had gotten in to Ruggles at 3:15 and we had 4:00 tickets and my mom was waiting for me at the MFA. 3:45 i got back to the vicinity of Ruggles and i finally asked someone for directions and he pointed down a street and told me to go straight for a few blocks until i got to Huntington Ave. And of course once i got to Huntington i could see the museum and it was fine and i got there at five minutes of.

<a href=http://mfa.org/exhibitions/iol/default.asp>Impressions of Light: The French Landscape from Corot to Monet</a> wasn’t all that great. I want the Monet and his ilk, the pretty light and colors. There were a lot of etchings and other stuff (though some of the photographs were lovely, and i’m impressed at what good condition they’re in 150 years later). Eventually we walked into a room entitled “The Impressionist Revolution,” and the entire facing wall was Monet, and i thought, “Okay, i’m home now,” because i love the Impressionists and i feel really comfortable around them.

We checked out <a href=http://www.mfa.org/exhibitions/travelingscholars_2003.html>Traveling Scholars 2002</a>. This was, um, interesting. A lot of modern art i just don’t get, even with informational booklets.<ul><li>I was more impressed by Nuno de Campos’s <i>Lap</i> series once i realized they were paintings not photographs, but i still didn’t get the point.<blockquote>These laps of influential warmth reject the category of objectual torso. They confront the viewer with a fictional space of inter subjectivity in which projection and perception—expectations and reality—seldom coincide. The lap is portrayed as a site of mutual domination and dependency. It materializes the intimate slippage of objectificarion from adoration, which characterizes the act of painting itself.</blockquote>Isn’t there a problem if i need the artist’s explanation to care? I mean, i love knowing what the artist is thinking, but shouldn’t the viewer be able to “get it” just viewing the painting? This is begging for a long and tortured analysis of what makes art -- is it pretty? does it make people think? who gets to decide what is art? - and i am so not going there.<li>Adrian Carroll was even worse. Visual fragments and stuff. I’m always asking when viewing stuff like this, “How can i be cool enough that i can do this kinda stuff and have it called art and displayed in a major museum? ”<li>Heidi Johnson, on the opposite wall, was full of color, and there were detailed insects and flowers and i could get behind that as art.<li>The Cree Bruins exhibit was cool -- read <a href-http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/arts/art/documents/02749950.asp>this article</a> about it<li>Julio César Roman was, um, interesting. I can get into the queerness and the masculinity and the space and the body and stuff, though.<li>Todd J. Elliott: logos, numbers, polycarbonate panels... i felt like i was in a diner or something and totally don’t get how this is art<li>Terence Hammonds: *shrug*<li>Jerry Russo: gates -- interesting concept to think about as your artist’s statement discussed, perhaps viewing the exhibit with that in mind i could get behind it a bit more as art<li>Judy Kermis Blotnick: interesting, use of white space and spatial relationships and stuff (reading <a href=http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/057/living/MFA_s_show_of_Scholars_is_rewarding_for_all+.shtml>this article reminds me of what i liked about it</a>)</ul>So yeah, basically the stuff was “interesting.” I feel like too many modern artists are trying too had to be different and avant-garde and such.

Then there was <a href=http://mfa.org/exhibitions/singularvision_blake-purnell.html>A Singular Vision: The Melvin Blake and Frank Purnell Legacy</a>. That was largely 20th-century Spanish artists, a lot of which was good. Also the MFA’s first Magritte.

When Mrs. Flemer drove me home i mentioned that i was going to the <a href=http://www.mfa.org>MFA</a> over break and also mentioned that i’d been to the <a href=http://www.metmuseum.org>Met</a> when i went to NYC over the summer. She was critical of the fact that the MFA is very kinda old, doesn’t do modern stuff, and all the modern stuff is in NYC, but honestly, the MFA has a decent modern section (better than the Met’s, in my opinion,) and the past couple years has had a fair amount of temporary exhibits by modern artists. Besides, it’s Boston. People <i>want</i> the more traditional art.

It was about 6:30 and the next train was at 7:40, so we poked around the gift shop for a while. They have a lot of nice stuff, like <a href=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1889833193/qid=1048218742/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/104-7042821-4167925> this book</a> which i would totally get for any Boston area kid.

I don’t always understand the MFA, though. One book we happened upon was <a href=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/3822859060/qid=1048211983/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/104-7042821-4167925>this one</a>. So. Bizarre.

So yeah, that was my day.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments