beamjockey (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
beamjockey) wrote2006-09-17 11:52 pm
beamjockey) wrote2006-09-17 11:52 pm
Ongoing New York Conversation
On previous visits to New York, I've seen:
Empire State Building
Guggenheim Museum (entirely devoted to one artist at a time, not one I
liked at the time I visited)
Broadway shows (best was a revival of *Fiddler on the Roof*)
Union Square Park
The Strand, a huge used book store (repeatedly!)
Tried visiting MOMA (but they were closed for renevations and had about 100 paintings on display)
MOMA regular gift shop (like any other art museum)
MOMA "Design" gift shop (fascinating and made me want to look at their industrial design collection)
Ellis Island
Lots of restaurants, cupcake shops, etc.
American Museum of Natural History (briefly, ran out of time after 45 minutes, obviously more to see there!)
This time, I have had meals and conversations with a bunch of fascinating people, plus a visit to the Museum of the City of New York near Central Park, which I liked. It was about right for nine bucks and two hours. Could have used maybe 20 more minutes, but I saw most things of interest. It doesn't tell the story of the whole city but is more "selected topics:" interior design of NY residences, firefighting, Broadway, a toy gallery, John D. Rockefeller Senior's bedroom furnishings, and a nice review of New York's maritime history featuring good ship models and a couple of fantastic forced-perspective dioramas.
As for my taste in art, I like realistic paintings best, and Vermeer is a favorite. Once in a radio interview (stop me if you've heard this, it's one of my sigfiles), I heard Charismatic Art Guy Thomas Hoving describe Vermeer as "one of the great 17th-century painters of all time." Hard to argue with that!
Mrs. Husted tried to expose her students to a broad range of Western art and architecture, so I like all kinds of stuff in museums. I am puzzled (as many of the artists intended) by the art of the shattered 20th century, and tend to
take refuge in pop culture instead. Last time I visited a modern art museum, I observed that the only pieces I liked were either whimsical or clever hacks. Maybe fine art in the 21st will get better.
Probably I would enjoy the Met, the Cloisters, the design part of the MOMA, and scattered other parts of the MOMA.
Looks like my brother and I are hitting the MOMA tomorrow. I've always wanted to see the Intrepid, so I'll probably go there Tuesday.
Empire State Building
Guggenheim Museum (entirely devoted to one artist at a time, not one I
liked at the time I visited)
Broadway shows (best was a revival of *Fiddler on the Roof*)
Union Square Park
The Strand, a huge used book store (repeatedly!)
Tried visiting MOMA (but they were closed for renevations and had about 100 paintings on display)
MOMA regular gift shop (like any other art museum)
MOMA "Design" gift shop (fascinating and made me want to look at their industrial design collection)
Ellis Island
Lots of restaurants, cupcake shops, etc.
American Museum of Natural History (briefly, ran out of time after 45 minutes, obviously more to see there!)
This time, I have had meals and conversations with a bunch of fascinating people, plus a visit to the Museum of the City of New York near Central Park, which I liked. It was about right for nine bucks and two hours. Could have used maybe 20 more minutes, but I saw most things of interest. It doesn't tell the story of the whole city but is more "selected topics:" interior design of NY residences, firefighting, Broadway, a toy gallery, John D. Rockefeller Senior's bedroom furnishings, and a nice review of New York's maritime history featuring good ship models and a couple of fantastic forced-perspective dioramas.
As for my taste in art, I like realistic paintings best, and Vermeer is a favorite. Once in a radio interview (stop me if you've heard this, it's one of my sigfiles), I heard Charismatic Art Guy Thomas Hoving describe Vermeer as "one of the great 17th-century painters of all time." Hard to argue with that!
Mrs. Husted tried to expose her students to a broad range of Western art and architecture, so I like all kinds of stuff in museums. I am puzzled (as many of the artists intended) by the art of the shattered 20th century, and tend to
take refuge in pop culture instead. Last time I visited a modern art museum, I observed that the only pieces I liked were either whimsical or clever hacks. Maybe fine art in the 21st will get better.
Probably I would enjoy the Met, the Cloisters, the design part of the MOMA, and scattered other parts of the MOMA.
Looks like my brother and I are hitting the MOMA tomorrow. I've always wanted to see the Intrepid, so I'll probably go there Tuesday.
no subject
no subject
K. [also a representationalist. BTW, it seems the Frick has *two* Vermeers, and the Met has 2 as well. You might want to call and see if they are on display if you want to see them]
no subject
K.
no subject
no subject
*Lesson here: many art historians and critics don't really know much about *producing* artwork...
As for the "shattered 20th Century", it is perhaps hard for us to appreciate at this remove, but the Great War was *highly* traumatic to the Western psyche (and the artists smelled it coming about 15 to 20 years off); subsequent events didn't relieve things any. I found it an interesting exercise to take a large Western art history book and treat it like a flipbook: you can see something nasty was happening during roughly 1890-1960 just from the choices of palettes and textures; you simply confirm your suspicions later by noting the subject matter.