PETER'S NEW YORK
January 1, 2006 - THE MUSEUM OF MODERN ART - WHAT IS MODERN?
The name "modern art" - where did it come from? It must
suffer the same fate as the adjective "new." At some point in its
history, the term will no longer apply. It generally refers to
contemporary art, but in this particular
case, it refers to a sea change in art styles that occurred in the
early 20th Century. The impressionists painted with a bold style that
lacked literalism but was true to its subject. Post-impressionists
imposed a psychological
interpretation to events, while remaining faithful to the broad
outlines of their subject. Some classify these two traditions as the
earliest forms of modern
art, but others point to cubism and abstract art as the true
progenitors.
Still, such nomenclature is bound to become a
misnomer as time passes. The very earliest trends in modern art are
already a hundred years old. At the
same time, nothing in today's forms of abstraction tops the Dadaists,
who in the
late teens and early '20s applied an absurdist ideology to their art,
which begs the question: have the arts lost their direction?
If art relies on the symbolic nature of
cognition to excite the human imagination, one can understand how
the impressionists succeeded in their program. Instead of a literal
rendering, they relied on the human imagination to fill in what was
only suggested. Their works pointed to a larger reality that was within
the realm of interpretation of the viewer. Much of modern and abstract
art, on the other hand, presents color combinations and geometric
forms but fails to point to a greater realm to which these figures
refer. As
a result, such works dead-end the viewer in the same way as
a totally literal rendering of a subject would.
One can't help wonder about these matters as one
visits the new Museum of Modern Art. A friend of mine from Japan
whom I had not seen in over a decade visited me recently, and
we spent part of a day at the Museum of Modern Art, founded in
1930. Modern art
has never been my favorite, but I was favorably impressed with the
museum's format and comfort level. It is spacious, and well
attended, in spite of the prohibitive $20 entry fee. Besides several
exhibition halls, it hosts a couple of adequate eateries, and a
sculpture garden. I would say the atmosphere was
pleasant. There seemed to be a lot going on, and, although my friend
and I could not spend more than a few hours there, I did come away
favorably impressed, except, of course, for the matter of the museum's
chief sponsors. It appears that David Rockefeller, who seems to be
influential in U.S. foreign policy matters, although he has never
served in elected office, is one of the big movers and shakers of this
unusual institution. Furthermore, New York City taxpayers forked over
some $65 million of their hard-earned money to subsidize construction
of the new building to house the museum, completed some months ago.
Other donors gave comparable gifts, but they had the
satisfaction of having their names tacked onto a gallery,
whereas no room is named after the City of New York or its taxpayers.
These issues did not present themselves as topics of
conversation for my friend and I. She would have had difficulty
understanding them in short order, partly because of the language
barrier, but also because she had not lived here for quite some time,
and matters of import to residents had not much relevance to a visitor.
But she was not insensitive to the current condition of world politics,
and mentioned that the Japanese were not favorably disposed to the
current chief executive of this country, an attitude that she noted was
highly uncharacteristic of the Japanese.
We could not stay more than a couple of hours at the
museum,
as we had to make a matinee of Spamalot,
which was not the greatest
choice for a play. Monte Python and
the Holy Grail, the movie upon
which the aforementioned play was based, did a much
better job of conveying the humor of its creators, in my opinion. After
seeing the play, I
let my friend rest in her room at the Bowery White House hotel while I
visited some friends at Alt.Coffee on Avenue A,
and rejoined her some hours later for dinner. We passed the New Year's
first moments at a Ukrainian eatery on 9th Street and 2nd Avenue.
"2006" has a nice ring to it. If
we can avoid being strafed or bombed
by U.S. artillery, or blown to pieces by a suicidal religio-political
malcontent, we have an excellent chance of enjoying a happy and
prosperous New Year.1
Public Policy
The New York Times watch
Jan 13 '06 NYT Tale of Two
theories:
Iraq wants to build a bomb, or the West wants control of its oil
Connecticut Art Scene
Feature Archives
Links
Siberian
Coffee Pipeline Co.
Flexi-Planner
Time Management
Museum of Brooklyn Art and
Culture
The NEST Building, home of PD
Studios and the Museum of Brooklyn Art and Culture in Bridgeport,
Connecticut
Comments? Send to the attention of the editor, Peter Duveen,
pduveen@yahoo.com
Copyright 2004-2006 by Peter Duveen