The Moma
In
our first blog assignment students were instructed to answer the question “what
is art?”. I defined art from
dictionary.com and it gave the following definition: “the quality, production, expression or realm, according to
aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of
more than ordinary significance.” I also wrote “In my own opinion, I suppose art can be
anything really. It's paintings, fashion, music, or anything that you can find
beauty in. I guess art is different for everyone and every person has a
different taste.” After visiting
the MOMA in Manhattan my feelings on art have not changed much.
I
am not a very artistic person and can barely draw a straight line for a stick
figure. I also don’t really have
much of an eye for color and my favorite color is black. Like the quote on the
first page of the syllabus for this class says, "I don't know what art is
but I know what I like." I can totally relate. It’s normal for
people to shut out things that they do not understand. It’s very easy for a person to claim
they don’t like something because they don’t understand it. I was never good in art so why would I
like the subject? Since this class
I have really tried to open my mind and eyes to different types of art. Some of it is interesting and some of
it is very boring. What I don’t
understand is what makes something a classic and famous piece of artwork and
other pieces of artwork that are just as good if not better, not classical? Like you have taught us, some of us may
not like famous artwork but, we respect it. For example, one of the most famous paintings in the world
is the Mona Lisa by Leonardo Da Vinci.
I am not in love with this painting. I do not think that it’s the greatest painting I have ever
seen. It’s not a very pretty
painting. But on the other hand, I
respect it because I know that it is a classic. I also respect that there is a lot of mystery behind the painting,
which I believe is one of the many reasons it, is such a classic. It’s famous because nobody really knows
the true story of the painting.
Although
visiting the MOMA hasn’t really clarified my feelings on art I did enjoy
it. I enjoyed it because it was a
different experience for my father and me. Neither of us knows much about art so it was a cool learning
experience for us, and going to see a museum is not something that we would
ordinarily do. We saw a lot of
different paintings, sculptures and photography. Visiting the MOMA was definitely a learning experience for
the both of us and something we enjoyed learning together. We may not necessarily be into art, but
we both tried to broaden our horizons by seeing many different artists and
understand their artwork. Its fun
to imagine what the artist was thinking or feeling when they were creating
their piece. Understanding the
meaning of the artwork is hard, but its still fun to try and figure out.
In
my second blog post I wrote about impressionism. Impressionism is a style of
painting characterized by loose brushwork and vivid colors. In the late
1800's and early 1900's American artists started developing a style of
Impressionism that was similar to French artists. The Moma did not have a lot of impressionist paintings and
artists because of the time period that they were from, but I did get to see
Claude Monet’s “Water Lilies” painting, his “Agapanthus” and artists Pierre
Bonnard’s oil on canvas “Dining Room Overlooking the Garden”. In 1915 Claude
Monet built a large studio near his house in Giverny, a town forty-five miles
north west of Paris, for the creation of what he would call his grandes
decorations. The subject of these
works is the elaborate water lily pond and gardens that Monet had created on
his property- already the primary focus of his painting for nearly twenty years.
I was in absolutely awe at his Water Lilies oil on canvas. It was three different panels and
absolutely huge. Seeing this
painting in person made such a difference as opposed to seeing it on the
computer. A computer can do that
painting no justice. I would have
never thought that it would have been that big! Not only was it big but also it was beautiful. I definitely appreciated that as
art. You can tell how long and
hard an artist had to work to create that masterpiece. The painting features
softly flowing passages of cloud reflections on a tranquil surface punctuated
by pink lilies. The thick surface of the panel indicates the prolonged duration
of its making. Monet worked on this
and other paintings over a period of several years, building up layers of paint
as he altered and refined the compositions. You can see how detailed and how many layers that Claude
Monet put in this piece. You can
really see the brush strokes and layers in person where as on the computer or
in a book you would not be able to see that vivid detail.
In
my third blog post I wrote about artist Pablo Picasso. There was a lot more art in the MOMA
from Pablo Picasso. Pablo Picasso was a Spanish painter, sculptor, printmaker,
ceramicist and stage designer. He was a very influential artist of the
20th century and known for co-founding the Cubist movement, the invention of
constructed sculpture, the co-invention of collage, and many other styles that
he helped to develop. I saw “Woman
Plaiting Her Hair”, “Two Nudes”, “Les Demoiselles d’Avignon”, “Bather”, “Violin
and Grapes”, “Ma Jolie”, “Girl with a Mandolin”, just to name a few. Like I said about Claude Monet’s art, I
also enjoyed seeing Pablo Picasso’s work in person better then seeing it in a
book or on the computer. I
recognized a lot of his work from the artwork that you have shown us in
class. I wasn’t disappointed by
any of the artwork I was actually impressed with it because it looks so much
better in real life as opposed to seeing it on a projector. I feel like all artwork is more
detailed in person. In person you
can see the brush strokes and the painting looks more real. I believe that you can get a better
understanding of artwork if you are able to see it in person. Seeing a picture of something is a
totally different feel then getting to actually be there and see it
yourself.
As
well as the impressionist paintings and the artwork from Pablo Picasso there
was a whole lot more to the MOMA.
I looked at sculptures, design, architecture, paintings and
photography. My favorite was the
photography. My favorite photographer was Sanja Iveković. Born 1949 in Zagreb, Sanja is a Croatian photographer,
sculptor and installation artist. Considered to be one of the leading artists from the former Yugoslavia, she continues
to inspire many young female artists.
Her photos were really inspiring to me. In the early 1970s when,
together with other artists, she broke away from mainstream settings,
pioneering video, conceptual photomontages and performance. Much of her work is centered on her own life
and the place of women in today's society. There were photos of beautiful women who are models but on
the bottom of each photo there was a women’s name, age, where she was from and
a little background story. Each woman
told a horrible tale of being raped, abused, and left by her husband and what
happened after and how they were continuing their life. It definitely made you stop and think,
why would Sanja show a model and then put such a horrible story underneath of
it? It made me think that no
matter how good a person looks on the outside, you never know what kind of
battle they are struggling with on the inside. I felt her photos were very inspirational and I know that in
the 1970’s it was bold for her to put such strong photos out there for people
to see.
Another
artist that I saw was David Alfaro Siqueiros. He was a Mexican painter and I was attracted to his
artwork. In his painting “Echo of
a Scream” it shows a baby in distress in what appears to be some kind of a junkyard
and behind the baby is another huge baby head, which I believe is to be the
“echo”. Both babies are screaming. This painting was really powerful and I
was impressed at the detail. The
babies looked so real and the detail on their faces was amazing right down to
the wrinkles on the forehead and the scrunched up nose. Another painting by David Alfaro
Siqueiros was “The Sob”. This was
a painting of what I believe is a man and his arms and hands are covering his
face because they are sobbing.
Although you cant see this persons face you know that they are sobbing
because of the way they are holding their arms up and their head down. This painting like the “Echo of a
Scream” is also very detailed. The
hands and arms just look so realistic and you can see the creases on them like
a real arm and hand would have.
Lastly,
something that I didn’t like was by artist Willys de Castro. This art was called “Active Object” and
is oil on canvas mounted on wood.
To me this looked like a white canvas with one black line on it sticking
out of the wall. Art like this is
why I have trouble understanding art.
I can easily stick a white canvas on the side of the wall and call it
art and I have practically no artistic ability. So what makes this artwork famous and get to be in a museum
when there are a million of other kids my age who can create a really nice
painting and its not famous. I
understand that maybe it is famous because before it was created it was never
done before and the idea of it is why it is considered art. But at the end of the day it looked
like a canvas sticking out of the wall and looked like it required little
effort as opposed to the other paintings that I wrote about.
In
conclusion although art still isn’t my favorite subject, visiting the Moma was
a good experience for me. It can
never hurt to try and understand things that you don’t necessarily like. I doubt I will ever be able to paint
something like Picasso did but at least I can say I got to see his artwork up
close!
