Exploring Modernism at the MFA

Enough with the grand tradition. Let's create and appreciate art that reflects modern life; at least, that's how I feel now that I have finished Art History and can finally take off the blinders. The "grand tradition" of writing essays has been replaced by the more modern teaching tools of journal entries and blog postings. Should I be excited? Hell yeah, I should. I can finally look at and begin to make sense of paintings like this one, Untitled by Yves Tanguy. I can see connections between art and real life, something that would make Modernists proud. The unanswered questions that this painting leaves for the viewer parallel many of life's unanswered questions. It leaves the majority of the interpretation up to the viewer. This focus on the subjective, with a rejection for the objective, stands tall as a modernist value. No information is explicitly given by Tanguy to the viewer; he is all about giving each viewer the oportunity for a unique human experience. Tanguy's minimalist approach to the work, coupled with a clear rejection for the distinction between high and low culture (an almost cartoonish appearance??) leave me wondering what the work was painted for and who commissioned it. (Or if it was commissioned at all!) I guess it shouldn't matter though really, because wouldn't a Modernist be just fine with leaving those facts to the appreciator's imagination...?

Evolution of Art

As with any current trend, in television, film, literature, paintings, sculpture, etc. there will be groups who will move against the constant waves to bring about a new and often disturbing art form. Many times the initial reaction by the general public is a form of disgust, hatred, and misunderstanding. New periods are often described as radicalism but then, in time, evolve into their own "era". From romanticism and impression to modernism and atonality. The relationship of paintings and music can be closely related at all points in time. During our trips to the Museum of Fine Arts this realization became even more apparent. As I examined the Impressionist paintings by Monet, Pissarro, Renoir I could hear pieces composed by the current Debussy and Chopin. The flowing romantic harmonies were present in not only the music but as the paintings as well. As we shifted our position into Modernism I no longer heard this flowing, romantic, music. My thoughts suddenly moved towrads the pieces of Schoenberg, Webern, and Stravinsky. At first sight or listen these art forms can create an unsettling, abstract, feeling that is so well represented by the works. If you consider the opening of the Rite of Spring by Stravisnky or the premiere of Picasso's work public brawls insued. It is ironic that this "extremist" works are now considered masterpieces like those before them. It is easy to categorize these artists into certain areas but in actuality they too evolved through different stages of expression, revolting against themselves. This ever-changing process of evolution is why art, in all forms, will continue to exploit the emotions of the experiencer and bring about timelessness.

Duchamp truly wants to show the importance of and satisfaction he gains through motion. in this case, it is quite evident that motion is to be achieved through the movement of the bicycle wheel because it is mounted on top of a stationary object. the wheel lacks a seat and is upside down for a reason--that reason ironically being, motion! the artwork itself most definetly lends itself to our first characteristic of modernism. we should not be concerned with what we are percieving the wheel to physically be, rather we should just "see" what is "taking place" in the artwork--that would be motion! secondly, minimalism plays a key role in this work. Duchamp reduced movement completely down to a single object; the bare essential needed to convey the message was utilized. and finally, Duchamp definetely uses an unconventional way of portraying the importance of motion. he chooses to voluntarily juxtapose motion and the absence of motion by wheel and stool respectively. what better way to show than showing objects we are all quite familiar with. i do not think we would gain the same message if Duchamp used a painting or photograph to convey his message. that fact that we can "SEE" the wheel gives us an even stronger sense of movement than if we just "LOOKED" at a 2D representation.

Here we are at the MFA

Modernism

So we make a detour away from our exploration of film after a discussion of relations of looking in Hitchcock's Rear Window and end up in Modernism. This week we'll explore how Modernism tried, in the words of poet Ezra Pound, to "Make it new!"

SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF MODERNISM
1) subjectivity—how seeing takes place, rather than on what is perceived—instead of objectivity
2) blurring the distinctions between genres and media
3) fragmentation (of time, space, perspective, etc)
4) a tendency toward reflexivity, or self-consciousness, about the production of the work of art, so that each piece calls attention to its own status as a production, as something constructed and consumed in particular way
5) minimalism
6) rejecting the distinction between "high" and "low" or popular culture, both in choice of materials used to produce art and in methods of displaying, distributing, and consuming art.

Marcel Duchamp went so far as to say in 1912, "Painting is "washed up." In abandoning painting, he said, "I want something where the eye and the hand count for nothing." This image here is Marcel Duchamp's "ready-made" The Bicycle Wheel (1913). Do you see it expressing any of the characteristics of modernism listed above?

Let the blogging begin!

Last week, we went to the MFA for our first visit and we had a whirlwind trip through the history of Western art. We didn't get to discuss "relations of looking," so we'll do that in class this week, especially focusing on the turn to modernism. Here we have Mary Cassatt's In the Loge (1878), Pablo Picasso's Les Demoiselles d'Avignon (1907), Georges Braque's
Violin and Candlestick (1910), and marcel Duchamp's Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2 (1912). How do these paintings express relations of looking?


RELATIONS OF LOOKING: Who is looking at whom (or what)?

1) The gaze in the image (painting, photograph, frame): Who is looking at whom? What does it mean? Does the image look back at you directly in any way? Is there an audience in the image?

2) The viewer's gaze: (looking at the frame): How are you positioned as the viewer? What can you see? What is hidden? What is your relationship to the image?

3) The artist's gaze: From what point of view does the maker of the image work?