Saatchi

1. Sightlines

The Saatchi Museum definitely employed a great use of space in order to create an environment that enabled a multitude of different sightlines when viewing a piece.  This is especially evident when one studies the placement of pieces such as "Up", "Down", and "Swarm".  Rather than being shoved up against a wall, these works were placed towards the floor center, allowing observers to walk completely around the object and to view it from multiple vantage points.  This created a feeling of immersion within the piece, allowing one to experience it in multiple ways.  This definitely diverts from the layouts found in many of the other museums, where the artwork is placed directly against the wall, limiting one's view of the piece.

2.  Didactics

For me, the absence of a comprehensive description of the piece within close proximity to the artwork itself did nothing to lessen my experience.  My relationship with the art is entirely based on how I see it visually, or what immediate feelings it stirs up within me.  An in depth knowledge of the piece's background (including the artist's intentions) usually does nothing to enhance that experience.  In fact, I feel that it may hinder my subjective opinion's of the piece, as I may force myself to see it the way the artist meant it to be seen, rather than simply allowing myself to see it in my own personal way.

3.  Collection

I definitely felt that the collection was more adventurous.  Most of the other museums we have visited feature pieces that are typically considered classically as "art" (paintings, drawings, sculptures, etc.).  However, here we see such pieces such as swarm, where real dragonflies and bumblebees are doing battle with fictional demons, all strung up in a three dimensional casing.  We also saw the incredibly unconventional Spam piece, where multiple posters were hung up displaying vulgar and nonsensical pieces of Spam.  However, although these are not necessarily conventional pieces of art, they definitely all had an effect on me, and both I believe made commentaries about life.  While Swarm made me question the idea of what is small and meaningless, the Spam piece made me consider the values of our society today.  For me, these are not meaningless pieces, they are steps forward.

Grafitti

1. Mary Poppins

This picture is truly beautiful.  Notice how the red dress she is wearing corresponds to the red dumpster on the left, allowing Poppins to successfully blend with the environment.  Above all, however, is the beauty of the idea itself.  Notice how grimy and blackened the rest of the parking area is.  The presence of Mary Poppins indicates a wish to simply pick up an umbrella and rise above all of it, above all the nastiness of the world.  In this piece, that wish is granted, which makes it not only beautiful, but also a celebration of the human spirit.

2.  After Lives

Here we have another thoughtful piece.  What the artist did well here was complement the term "After Lives" with a series of pictures that evoke mystery and a sense of barriers.  The after life of anyone cannot be understood or truly known while we are here on earth, thus we see in this piece a jungle which shrouds our ability to see beyond in, while the black and white checkered pattern suggests a wall which cannot be  seen past while we are living.  Also, notice how perfectly the location fits in.  The wall faces westward, so as the sun sets we see the orange glow which complements the orange coloring at the top, evoking more thoughts of the great beyond.

3. Bad #1

Possibly the only compliment I can give to this piece is that the artist had some skill when it came to forming his letters so they looked dynamic and textured using some shadow techniques.  This can especially be observed in the letter B.  However, besides that, I don't see the piece making any sort of statement.  It does not touch me on an emotional level or engage me intellectually.  Ugliness can be beautiful when used wisely, but this is just ugly.  The only reason it fits in with the area is because all of the work around it is just as wasteful.

4.  Type

This is just horrible.  The word "type", written in this way, inspires absolutely zero thought.  It is a lone word with little graffitti around it, meaning that it fits in horribly.  Even the type font of the type doesn't inspire any thought.  Just worthless.

When I first walked in to Sir John Soane's museum (formerly his house), I was immediately surprised by the breadth of paintings, sculptures, and architectural models that seemed to inhabit every inch of every room.  I walked through the tightly packed space, each beautiful room leading into another, and eventually found a staircase leading down into the dark interior of the building.

"There's a whole lot more down there," said a museum employee.  "Plenty of sculptures."

I looked down again into the dark, cramped space, contemplating whether or not the room would be big enough to store even a wheelbarrow, much less an entire collection of art.  I looked at the employee, who smiled.  So I smiled back and began the descent.

Downstairs, I found that the employee's tip was spot on.  The landing completely opened up into another  set of rooms.  I passed rows upon rows of artwork, walking quietly, pausing every now and then to consider the facial creatures of a Roman sculpture, or the intricacies of one of Sir John Soane's various architectural drawings.

Suddenly, however, I realized that I wasn't alone.  To my right, a young woman was also browsing the shelves.  She was dressed fashionably, and had a bright mane of blonde curls that circled her face and gathered up under her black scarf.  She was very beautiful, and I naturally began to feel quite awkward standing so close to her in an empty room.

I turned forward and began to study the painting in front of me, which portrayed a port where a white palace stood off to one side, nudging up against the water.  Ships were streaming in and out of the port, and behind the palace the sun was fading, rendering the sky a collage of pinks and yellows.  I wondered why, among other things, was Sir John Soane such an avid fan of art, why he dedicated so much of his time to beauty, to collecting paintings such as these over and over again.

As I stood there, I could feel the girl on my right moving closer to me, taking her time as she pondered each piece.  My hands began to sweat, as they often do in situations such as these.  My breathing became shallow as I tried to make myself as small as possible, as I attempted to hide among the beautiful works of art that surrounded us.

And then, suddenly, she stopped beside me.

"Amazing, isn't it?" she said.  I turned to her, and she laughed a bit.  "I mean, all of this."

"Yeah.  It is."  This was all I said.  We looked at one another for a few more moments and then she moved on.  In reality, it was nothing, but I left the museum that day feeling lifted, as if I had truly met a stranger for the first time in my life.  And that is what art can do.  It has the power to connect people, to join two strangers in mutual admiration of the work.  It was one of the best lessons I've learned yet on this trip.

National Portrait Gallery

Henry VIII

-For this portrait of King Henry the VIII, I decided to insert John McGuire.  I chose this because they are both big powerful men, and are basically bosses.  John also has a natural ability to grow glorious facial hair.  This, in combination with his size, induces fear in his enemies and respect amongst friends, much the same as Henry did.  Thus, they are a perfect match.

George Washington

-(This, as you will see, is clearly my object of desire).  I chose to match myself with George Washington.  My reasoning is simple.  We share much of the same qualities including a love of America, a love of freedom, and a love for being the best country on this earth.  Also, my skills at Risk (the boardgame) are pretty good, so we share a natural ability to command armies.  This all, of course, is in addition to the fact that both George and I have a natural, unbeatable charisma.  God bless you George, and God bless America!

John Donne

-For this portrait of John Donne, I chose my buddy Karl Iglesias.  I did this because they both are artists and poets.  Also, they are always looking very fresh.  Notice the chest hair I have included to illustrate the amount pure game that Karl exudes, much the same as the smooth talking writer of metaphysical love poems, John Donne. 

Bernard Montgomery, 1st Viscount of Montgomery

-For this portrait of Bernard Montgomery I chose my friend Matt Apel.  As I found out, Bernard Montgomery was a soldier in the first world war, and even after being left for dead in battle, he kept on fighting.  This fighting spirit and tactical mind is exactly what I see in Matt Apel.  I witness it in both his dedication to fitness and the pure tactical genius he displays when we play Risk.  Fight on, Apel, fight on.

Harold Wilson

-This I felt was an interesting choice.  Harold Wilson led a political career and eventually ended up as Prime Minister.  I therefore matched him with Max Florian.  This summer, Max will begin his political career with an internship at Parliament.  Another uncommon talent they share is the ability to smoke copious amounts of tobacco, indicated by the smoke surrounding the face in the portrait.  Incredibly important men, these two.

The National Gallery

1. Critique the logo

Is this just a typeface?  

After viewing the collection, would you propose a different typeface or a symbol?

Yes, I think it is rather obvious that this title is simply a typeface.  Although it is not an ugly logo to observe, it is also not very memorable.  This is due to the fact, in my opinion, that both words “National” and “Gallery” get pretty equal attention and are both displayed in the exact same way.  Perhaps there logo could involve simply the first letters “N” and “G” in some way, or more attention could be given to the word “National”.  Another idea would be to use the unique position of the museum’s location within

Trafalgar Square

, by perhaps including the four pillars of the Square within the title.  This would associate the logo with a specific area making it more memorable.

2. van Gogh

In your opinion, do the van Gogh paintings live up to their position in art history? Feel free to discuss: line quality, gestural brushwork, color, mood, subject matter, etc. You may also feel free to compare and contrast two van Gogh paintings (to elaborate on your level of engagement).

Although I do not think the subject matter of many of the van Gogh paintings depart from what was painted at the time (natural scenery, still life of household objects, self portraits, etc.), his interpretation of these subjects is entirely different.  The picture above is a great illustration of this innovative spirit.  One of the most prominent things to notice is his novel use of color and brushwork.  Notice how he uses bold color differences to highlight borders of objects, and how there is no smooth transition within an object from color to shadow.  Rather, any shadows on an object are just bold black strokes.

This particular use of color serves a critical purpose: it highlights each stroke, helping the viewer to pay a vast amount of attention to the brushstrokes used rather than the colors themselves.  Thus we are allowed to see the true mood of the painting.  We see that with this new technique of highlighting stroke, van Gogh can simulate a windy day simply by curling these strokes through the clouds, or making the lines within a tree non-linear.  In this way, the whole mood takes on a more tangible feel, and is a prime reason why van Gogh definitely deserves his place in history.

3. Object of Desire

What object from the collection would be suitable for your future home? Describe the characteristics that make this both a desirable work of art –and suitable for your future penthouse, cottage, log cabin, trailer… Please provide artist name and title.

Usually I rely on my camera to take pictures of the object and to remember the name of it, but they didn’t allow pictures in the camera.  However, they had this beautiful golden chest, about six foot in length, that would be perfect for a future bachelor’s penthouse.  I would insulate the inner lining of it, install plumbing, and turn it into a hot tub.  Naturally I would call it my Chill Chest.  The Chill Chest would be great for my “game”.  It solves two purposes.  Not only can a woman be looking at amazing art while sitting in a hot tub, but the small size of it guarantees that we’d have to be very close to one another while sitting down in it, allowing me to tactically escalate the romance in any dinner date.

4. Gallery / Display

The National Gallery has the brightest palette of wall color thus far from our museum visits. Do these colors enhance or interfere from the displays? Do you prefer the minimal palette of the Tate Modern in comparison?

I don’t necessarily think it would be fair to compare the Tate Modern and the National Gallery in the same way.  Yes, they both have drastically different color palettes of wall color.  However, each works to the advantage of its unique collection.  For example, I believe some of the beauty of modern art lies within its relative mundanity/bleakness, which is inevitably reflected in the blank white walls.  The National Gallery, on the other hand, is the exact opposite.  The colors of course are brighter and more vibrant, but this simply reflects and enhances the same mood we find within the gallery itself.  In both cases, the collection fits naturally within the surroundings.

5. Exploitation / Merchandising?

Does the use of objects from the collection to create merchandise such as handbags, umbrellas, and t-shirts diminish the original work of art? Are certain forms of merchandising more acceptable –and if so what are those forms –postcards and posters? 

I can understand why someone would take this position.  I, however, don’t believe that the art is being exploited.  There’s a general opinion that this art is elite and made to sit there so we can come through in lines and view them and consider them.  But art wasn’t made to be locked away.  Expressing a van Gogh piece on your handbag is just as interesting to me as a poster hanging up in one’s room.  Art is cultural, not meant to be locked away.  In my opinion, the more people with cheap but artful handbags, the better.

6. Object of appreciation

Provide a short description of your favorite object from the collections? Please provide label information such as name, date, origin, etc. Why would you return to this object for greater contemplation? 

Although I couldn’t decide on just one piece, I think that the collective works of van Gogh that they displayed were truly my favorite pieces.  For reasons that I explained in the second question, I feel that van Gogh is undoubtedly one of the most innovative artists of recent history.  His use of stroke created an entirely new way to make pictures innovative, allowing him to express movement as if it was actually happening across the canvas.  This, in my opinion, is pure genius, and has provided a whole new level of experience in his art.

Tate Modern

1. Critique the logo

There are variations of the Tate Modern logo presented with a range of blurred effects. In your opinion what benefit or distraction is executed with variations of the logo? Do slight variations connect to the range of contemporary art more than a static/single logo?

Modern art is defined by a conscious break from old art ideologies, focusing on the emotional undercurrents that live within the bleak, scattered images of our everyday world.  Thus, it is proof in itself that art can be found anywhere, in a million different forms.  In this way the slight variations within the logo become its great benefit.  It connects to the work because it represents the ability of art to morph into a million different forms, and yet, under these myriad possibilities, there is always the same message (Tate).

2. Free Admission

Every museum that you have visited has free admission. In Chicago, admission to the Field Museum (Museum for biological and anthropological collections) is $29 Adult and $20 child. Are museums only for the rich in the United States? How do free museum admissions impact the London culture?

Although I would hesitate to say that museums in the United States are only for the “rich”, I would agree that these price differences set art in our country to a different standard.  By paying nearly thirty dollars to see a collection of art, you are unconcsciously agreeing that that collection is something extraordinary.  It becomes something that is both restricted to and external from society, something that is elite.  However, here in Britain, the museums are free.  Although I do not necessarily believe that this completely breaks the elitist vision of art as held in the United States, it definitely makes art more accessible.  Rather than being locked away, it seems to be melded in with the culture in general, allowing the public to grow and contemplate whenever they desire.  Here the art is the internal heartbeat of London, not an external gem one has to pay to see.

3. The Unilever Series: Al Weiwei

The Unilever Series is comprised of millions of individual porcelain objects. The curator states the following, “Each piece is a part of the whole, a commentary on the relationship between the individual and the masses.” Do you agree or do you believe the installation falls short of answering pointed questions such as: What does it mean to be an individual in today's society? Are we insignificant or powerless unless we act together? Feel free to express your opinion on the ongoing discussion of installation art.

I think that this series definitely falls short of answering either of those questions.  Although I understood that the mass of sunflower seeds were indeed a simulation of the masses, I don’t necessarily think the artist made a commentary on the relationship between those masses and the individual.  What is this artist trying to say?  That the individual is helpless among the sea of thousands?  Perhaps, though this wasn’t the original message that struck me.  I think a sea of seeds is simply too neutral a gesture to really inspire much contemplation.

4. Display

The gallery walls remain white throughout the Tate Modern exhibition spaces. Does the color white enable a neutral field for contemplation of the contemporary and modern art? Would you prefer a break in color – an introduction of additional hues to alter the experience, or do the corridors and spaces in between art displays enable visual pulses?

I believe much of the beauty from modern art lies in its relative simplicity and, at times, neutrality.  Thus, it would not be good to have a color scheme that enables the walls to distract form the work itself.  The color white enables the art to break from the neutrality of the background and shine.  These little moments of artistic bursts become that pulses that guide you as you walk through the museum.

5. Power station to Art museum

Describe your impressions both exterior and interior of the Tate Modern building. Is this an ideal building to house a modern collection?

Although the concept may seem strange at first, I believe that this site is perfect for housing a modern art collection.  The outside suggests a bleak sort of industrialism, a remnant of the working class.  The interior feels much the same, except much cleaner.  The interior walls are lined with iron beams that support the skeleton of the buiding, giving the museum a cold, bleak feel at times.  However, as a factory is on its own representing both a certain period and culture, it may even be considered a piece of art on its own.  Modern art is all about the contemplation of one’s position in society, and therefore the building is perfect to house the collection.

6. Object of appreciation

Provide a short description of your favorite object from the collections? Please provide label information such as name, date, origin, etc. Why would you return to this object for greater contemplation? 

I think the two pieces entitled Portrait 1986 and Portrait 1988 by Thomas Ruff were my favorite works from the collection.  I love how, rather than using sculptures, he uses photography to capture human expression.  However, the originality of these works derive from the complete lack of expression by the people themselves.  Notice that they are both well groomed and colorfully dress.  Indeed, everything about their appearance suggests success and happiness.  And yet, they seem almost robotic in their emotionless state.  This therefore leads to contemplation about the conflict between our interior selves, which is who we may truly be, and the exterior shell we choose to show the world.

Tate Britain

1. Critique the logo

Does the logo relate to the architecture, galleries, and collections? 

Describe the overall essence/energy?

The Tate Britain logo is displayed with letters that are fuzzy and less focused around the edges.  This gives the letters the slight appearance of having been spray painted there, which is a very modern form of art.  The font also lends an air of mystery.  All letters are out of focus, and the hole in the middle of the “A” can’t be seen.  These characteristics therefore feel as if a message is trying to work its way through the paint, although that message might not be crystal clear.  This relates to the art found in the galleries, where it often feels as if an emotion is pushing through the art, although the exact message in the work may be up for debate.

2. Ophelia

For members of the Theater class please contrast the depiction of Ophelia’s death in Director Nicholas Hytner’s Hamlet with the visual depiction of John Everett Millais painting. For members not enrolled in the Theater class, discuss why you think this painting is one of the most popular artworks in the collection. Is it part of the fabric of English Literature? Note: it is the highest selling postcard in the museum shop. 

The depiction of Ophelia’s death in Director Nocholas Hytner’s Hamlet was quite different from the scene depicted in the painting.  For example, in the play Ophelia is taken offstage and killed by an agent of a modern day policed state, whereas the painting is the classical display of Ophelia drowning.  However, I’d say possibly the greatest difference between the two depictions is that, in the play, Ophelia’s death is always done offstage, so we never see her die.  Thus, the artwork is able to offer a sense of closure to her death, in that we can physically see her on the canvas and we know that she has died.  In the painting, there is neither mystery about her death nor room for interpretation, while in the play it is our imagination that must be relied on in order to fill the gap.

  3. Display

Compare and contrast the varied display techniques of Gallery 11 and Gallery 9. Discuss the relationship of the sparsely arranged style with the modern art in contrast to the salon style hanging (presented in groups with multiple rows) of the Pre-Raphaelites.

I feel that the Pre-Raphaelite art means to impress visually and powerfully, whereas the modern art works to create feeling through experience.  The main differences are readily apparent.  In Gallery 9, the paintings were all done with an eye for detail and lush scenery, all of it framed by a large golden frame.  They were also all bunched very closely.  The modern art, on the other hand, often featured only solid backgrounds with simple geometric shapes in the foreground.  They often had no true frame, and there was also a lot of spacing between each painting.  The lack of a true frame made the art seem to blend into the wall, and so my emotional reaction was actually based off the room itself rather than on one single piece.  In contrast, the Pre-Raphaelite work was made to impress visually, and each piece could be viewed and contemplated on its own for long periods of time.  Thus, the modern pieces all worked together to create an emotional ambience, whereas the pre-Raphaelite pieces were independent of one another and expressed their own unique voices.

4. Installation Art

Describe your experience of “The Coral Reef” by Mike Nelson. Elaborate on the odors, navigation, mystery, etc. In your opinion – is this art?

The coral reef was a collaborative maze of various rooms, each representative of a certain lifestyle and decorated accordingly.  For example, in one room was a crack pipe and tin foil, whereas the very next one was a sixties style basement, carpeted and featuring hangings of John F. Kennedy.  However, most of the rooms shared a common, musty odor, as well as a sense of abandonment, as each room was rather sparse and poorly lit.  The gallery was also rather confusing to navigate, as the rooms were arranged in a sort of maze, so that you were rarely walking along the same direction twice, and often didn’t know if a door led to another room or if it would just be locked.

            In my opinion, this should definitely be considered art.  The main purpose of art is to evoke emotion or thoughtfulness within the observer, and I thought “The Coral Reef” did exactly that.  I frequenty felt lost, not simply because the gallery was hard to navigate, but also because of the sense of loneliness those sparsley decorated rooms seemed to evoke so easily.  It felt as if I was often intruding on the secret life of some person I did not know, which is the type of mental transformation I always look for in art.

5. Tate Britain versus V&A

Which museum experience did you find most favorable and why? Items for discussion: architecture, collection, navigation, etc. 

I think the Tate Britain was more favorable.  I base this not necessarily on navigation, as both museums did a pretty good job with that.  More than anything I just enjoyed the work more at the Tate, especially those pieces by Turner featuring vast landscapes and monumental storms at sea.  What grabbed me about these works was the scope.  He often included a detailed foreground scene, but it always seemed to be overshadowed by the openness of the horizon, evoking a sense of wonder and beauty from the world we know.  The V&A just tended to feature a lot of historical artifacts and work, which didn't really move me in the same way (although it was interesting).

6. Object of appreciation

Provide a short description of your favorite object from the collections? Please provide label information such as name, date, origin, etc. Why would you return to this object for greater contemplation? 

I would have to say my favorite part of the museum was “The Coral Reef” by Mike Nelson.  Walking through that exhibit was one of the only times where I felt that I was actually experiencing art rather than simply observing it.  I was completely immersed in a multitude of worlds, and I loved how the loneliness and hopelessness felt almost palpable depending on the room.  It was truly an original piece, and I felt completely transported into a world other than the one I know.