We must rely on protocol

[gfish]

Turns out the Met is closed on Mondays -- bad planning on my part. So instead of the Met and the Guggenheim, today was the Guggenheim and MoMA.

I really liked the Guggenheim. As a building, I mean. Which is awkward for me, because I'm much more comfortable dismissing FLW as an over-hyped hack whose roofs leaked. But, I've really got to admit it, the Guggenheim was one of the best museum experiences I've ever had. It was just lovely. To maintain some level of curmugeonlyness, I'll just point out that the floors were that horrible 50s inlaid sparkly concrete that makes the inevitable cracks stand out so nastily. It always makes me think of dying strip malls or other unpleasant institutional places, and blech. So there.

While I was there, the most charming thing happened. As I set off up the ramp, a young girl approached me, introduced herself, and earnestly asked if I would follow her. Bemused (YES I'M USING THAT WORD CORRECTLY), I complied, and she asked me to define progress. Not being particularly prepared for that, I said that it was the social movement towards moral perfection. Or, when asked for a clarification, the act of us becoming better people. She then led me to a woman in her 20s, and told her what I had said before smoothly disappearing. I was then passed from person to person in a helical, peripatetic discussion of progress. I don't think my technocratic perspectives were quite what they had in mind, but it was actually a pretty genuine exchange of ideas. (Except for the last guy, who kind of represented himself as the artist, who mostly seemed concerned with the dehumanizing aspects of Twitter and yawwwwwwwwn.) Strolling up the Guggenheim spiral, discussing whether progress and moral perfection is inevitable? Felt pretty awesome.

On my way back down, between the galleries, I could see the full operations now that I knew what to look for. Not a small thing, must have been at least 3 dozen people hidden all around, ready to jump out at the right time and take over the conversation. Utterly, utterly charming. (Yes, I've listened to Guggenheim Love several times today already.)

Did MoMA after that, which wasn't nearly as noteworthy. I practically drowned in Picassos, but seeing a Magritte in person was pretty cool, and Starry Night and Warhol and all that too. In the end, I'm simply not a non-representational art kind of guy. Not enough information density. The best moment was, on my way back down, noticing the Broken Obelisk out in the courtyard. I had vaguely known that there were other copies, but I certainly didn't remember one was here. It was like running into an old friend in a foreign city, putting a huge smile on my face.

I also finally bought some street meat, which was tasty enough. And that's the way it was.

Comments

[damiana-swan.livejournal.com]

What a wonderful experience and concept! Now THAT is interactive art, even if the artist kinda screwed it up at the end and tried to tell you what you were supposed to be thinking and feeling, instead of letting you decide for yourself.

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

Heh, you old curmudgeon you, using the Cronkite's signoff... :)

Twitter only dehumanizes if you let it, much like any other tool. Me? I use it for sharing and *making connections*... which I try to follow up face to face.

[beaq.livejournal.com]

Of course you're using that word correctly?

[ionan.livejournal.com]

A+ post, would read again.
Also, the bit about the Broken Obelisk inspired wistfulness in this reader. Well done, sir.

[maida-mac.livejournal.com]

Awesome. Just awesome.

[rollick.livejournal.com]

Was Anish Kapoor's "Memory" still installed at the Guggenheim? It actually made me tear up — by far the strongest reaction I had to anything there.

[gfish.livejournal.com]

It was, but I didn't understand what it was at the time. I saw the exterior and didn't connect it with the gaping black window around the corner. Reading about it now, I wish I had paid more attention. =\

[rollick.livejournal.com]

Apparently there was also a third perspective to see it from, and I missed that one because *I* wasn't paying enough attention.

It was the black window that made me cry. It was so perfect. From just a few steps back, it looked exactly like a black square painted on the wall. But standing right up next to it, I got the sense of a black cavernous space which I could only barely see into, and there was so much there that was lost no matter how hard I looked. It struck me as an amazingly apt metaphor for memory and all the things we forget, and trying to see into the thing, I wound up mourning for all the things I've ever forgotten. It really makes me want to see more Kapoors.

That aside, I wasn't that impressed with most of what was going on at the Guggenheim when I was there — I wound up thinking the museum was a better piece of art than a lot of what it housed.

[rollick.livejournal.com]

Also, it never even occurred to me to go to MOMA. I had no idea "The Starry Night" was there, and now I'm kicking myself. Clearly another trek to NYC is in order this year.

[dymaxion.livejournal.com]

MoMA has a pretty amazing permanent collection, and they get some really stunning shows through there. Right now, for instance, they've got Monet's "Water Lilies", if you're into that kind of thing, plus some more modern exhibitions.

[ashley-y.livejournal.com]

I saw the Anish Kapoor exhibition at the Royal Academy in London in October. I wrote up about it here (http://ashley-y.livejournal.com/421261.html) (locked). I can copy-paste it here if you're interested.

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Sounds very cool!

[dymaxion.livejournal.com]

Heh, see, I kind of feel the same way about representational art these days; it just doesn't have enough to say most of the time to be interesting, and instead it leans on, well, representation.

[elgordo42.livejournal.com]

ditto to that. I can stare at an abstract piece for a very long time...