The Museum of Arts and Design (MAD) is itself  work of art. The somewhat recently redesigned MAD building is modern and does a better job of representing the intensely awesome art that is on display within it than the building it replaced. The architect, Brad Cloepfil, called his work “editing” because the building was worked on while it was still standing (Robin Pogrebin, “Renovation Slowly Adds Some Light to Lollipops”, New York Times, 5 June 2007).One of the most radical changes was the opening up of many rooms by cutting away part of the building. Cloepfil then filled these openings with glass as to create views of Central Park and more importantly shed some of the much needed light on all of the artwork. The old building was ill equipped to be used as an art museum because the inside held little space for large exhibits. Now, thanks to Cloepfil’s work, the building can easily and efficiently function as a museum, with its own restaurant too.

Otherwise, after personally observing the building, inside and out, I feel confident in saying that it is a breathtaking work of art. From the outside, the building draws the attention of any passerby because of the added glass and obvious radiance. It seems as if all of Columbus Circle should stop and observe the building because of its uniqueness and utter beauty. On the other hand, the innards of the building are what make it so unbelievable. The architect changed the building into a curator’s dream. The large glass windows bring in warm sunlight throughout the day that seems to be much appreciated by the perusing visitors.  As I traveled from floor to floor I saw how the natural light didn’t only bring warmth but appeared to save money on lighting for the museum. Furthermore, the building has a lot less in it because of the “300 tons of concrete” that were taken from the site while construction was still in progress (Robin Pogrebin, “Renovation Slowly Adds Some Light to Lollipops”, New York Times, 5 June 2007). For use as an art museum the new MAD building has been equip with the most efficient floor plans to maximize space. Another important aspect of Cloepfil’s glass additions is the view of Central Park and the surrounding city. I realized his train of thought and concluded that on warm sunny days, during any part of the year, no one wants to be inside. The best way to bring the outside inside was his glass additions. Now as the people visiting the museum stroll leisurely from exhibit to exhibit they can see the outside and feel the warmth. The building’s new design is not only attractive in appearance but attracting in terms of bringing people inside. All year round the museum will see jubilant visitors coming and going thanks to the work of Brad Cloepfil and his fellow architects.

Share This Post!

Lee Krasner's "Mosaic Table" in "Crafting Modernism" at MAD Museum. Photo Credit: Pollock-Krasner Foundation/Artist Rights Society (ARS), New York.

Have you ever thought whether design and art was the same concept? Well, they are not. There are actually many differences between them. Having spent ten weeks at the Museum of Arts and Design (the MAD Museum), I’ve come to some conclusions.

According to dictionary.com, the literal definition of design is to “prepare the preliminary sketch or the plans for (a work to be executed), especially to the form and structure of:” In other words, it can also be defined as to plan skillfully. Designs are in a commercial sense and are calculated. They are more of a problem solving through communication. Communication is a way to figure out what the designer conveys. Some questions you should ask yourself when you come across a design are: what does this mean? or What is the message that the designer is trying to tell us? These questions are made to make you think and analyze the piece.  If you do not understand what the designer is trying to convey in his piece, then he has failed and the design is not successful. Unlike art, designs are always objective which makes it easier to depict whether a design is good or bad. Many people can immediately tell if the design was good and easy to understand, or bad and misunderstood. Designers make their designs to be audience driven. It is meant for the viewer to be entertained and have fun. Designers are limited due to the costumer’s requirements. Furthermore, designs are more architectural and building rather than being open-minded and unlimited.

Art is a form of expressing one’s self in way that you can easily tell what the message of the artist conveys. It also expresses one’s feeling and emotions. I feel that art is a more loose and unlimited content. Anything around you can be considered as art.  It can be interpreted as many things, and can be used to express yourself through paintings, drawings, sculptures, and even pictures. Thus, according to dictionary.com art means “the quality production, expression, or realm according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.” Comprehension is one thing that is not important in art. You might come across a painting that has both happy and depressing colors in it. In a picture described as that, no one would know what the artist is feeling, and it isn’t important to find out. The objective of an art piece can be created by what the artist is feeling through the color he uses. Artist uses art to burst out their creations in mind. Their art piece is not supposed to be audience driven. It shouldn’t have to target an audience whether they do like it or not. Art is subjective. A painting can have many different interpretations. And no interpretation is considered correct or incorrect. An artist can have an analysis for why he created a specific piece, but a viewer can have a different analysis for what that piece means to him. This is the difference between the two.

Share This Post!

John Mason's “Sculptural Form”; Peter Voulkos's “Vee”; Claes Oldenburg's “Giant BLT (Bacon, Lettuce, and Tomato Sandwich)”; and Trude Guermonprez's “Banner" in "Crafting Modernism." Photo Credit: Kirsten Luce.

I’ll bet the curator of Crafting Modernism at the Museum of Art and Design didn’t intend for her exhibit to look like hipster version of IKEA, but unfortunately, that’s exactly what happened.

It seemed to me that many of the peices there were functional enough for everyday use, but there was always at least one element that made them completely impractical. Take J.B. Blunk‘s “Scrap Chair” for instance. One half of the chair looks rather inviting, but the other half is composed entirely out of multicolored string, making the work interesting to look at, but not much else. Or, take the wooden baby cradle that doubled as a small wardrobe. Surely, you COULD leave your baby in it, but the woodwork was so dark and menacing I don’t imagine any child would ever enjoy rocking in it.

In terms of showcase, the entire two floors worth of art are poorly lit and difficult to navigate. The only thing stringing these completely unrelated pieces together was their connection to Modernism–which would have been fine if it were better organized. You could start off looking at one of Betty Cooke‘s extravagant, fashion-forward necklaces made of precious metals, soon find yourself face to face with one of Alexander Calder‘s untitled scribble paintings, and then end up staring at Adolph Gottlieb‘s simplistic stained glass without taking more than five or so steps. This idea of mixed mediums pervades through the whole scene with little connectedness between adjacent pieces. Variety is a marvelous thing when kept under control, but when it isn’t, it leaves the viewer disoriented and simply not amused.

Much like a perilous trip to the aforementioned IKEA, you could walk into Crafting Moderning expecting one thing and shuffle out with something completely different, novel, and unexpected. Perhaps, admittedly, I should have looked at the exhibit from more of a traditional artistic standpoint than a design-oriented one, but either way, while Crafting Modernism certainly won’t be the worst display you’ve ever seen, a trip to The Met will more than satisfy any Modernist appetite you may have.

Share This Post!

A photograph of Maurizio Cattelan hanging in the exhibit. Photo Credit: Jill Krementz.

Coming into the Guggenheim and seeing their latest art exhibit dangling from the ceiling is a bit unusual and overwhelming. Usually when viewing art, people look at every work individually which leaves time to think about it, but with Cattelan’s exhibition you have no choice but to take it all in at once. Maurizio Cattelan’s exhibit, Maurizio Cattelan: All, is on display until January 22nd. This of course is meant for the more cynical art lovers or the more open minded ones (and not the people in the middle) since Cattelan’s work is set on critiquing other artists. After this exhibition he said that he would be retiring, and who knows; maybe that’s for the best. A person who only has works that critique everyone else is most likely lacking the talent to create his own original artwork. Cattelan uses many artists and their works as examples to illustrate his main point; that nowadays anything can be considered art. He uses the character of Zorro from a very popular movie and takes his signature and shows it cut into the canvas as one example of mediocre art. Another example would be a broom put up against canvas creating folds. He also uses a lot of implicit as well as explicit disrespectful slang in his pieces. One example was when he put a cat, a donkey, a dog and a rooster on top of each other so of course after a while you realize what those animals are called in street slang and feel slightly offended. So if you are one of the people who enjoy this type of art criticism in art itself, I would highly recommend seeing this show; for others, not so much.

Share This Post!

Jennifer Trask's "Intrinsecus" in the exhibit "The Flora and The Fauna." Photo Credit: Ed Watkins.

As is often the case with human beings, we cannot help but fingerprint all that we touch. In the MAD Museum‘s exhibition of Flora and Fauna, the unique imprint of humanity is almost tangible, even amid the foliage. A sea of surreal sculptures and sketches, the array of artwork contains the esoteric air of natural beauty compiled with a distinctly human element. From a twisted vine entwined necklace resembling a crown of thorns to the butterfly guided wings of a plane, each piece evokes a sentiment of pseudo-serenity. However upon closer examination, the gallery at it’s basest level is marred by the cherubs and chains of human creation.

Furthermore, the exhibit seems to pit the burgeoning ‘flora and fauna’ against the seeds of industrialization. For example, in Jennifer Trask‘s piece, Intrinsecus, a gilded, superfluous picture frame is itself framed and overshadowed by a falsely blooming bouquet of flowers and bone– flora and fauna, life and death. Another piece seems similarly sentimental, commenting on humans once again through figures of a variety of animals. This piece, depicting a screaming goat rising up from a coil of serpents, calls to mind the agony and exhaust of various Greeks myths and the human condition– the hydra, fighting fate, the search for meaning above it all. Despite all the frills and fauvism of the exhibit, human nature gleams through, not necessarily victorious or defeated, but merely and distinctly present.

Solipsistic as it may be, an exhibit is rarely ever truly moving without the vital link of connection to the viewer, of dialogue between the silent observer and mute piece of work. Flora and Fauna, despite the root meaning of each word, despite the flowers, the fabrics, the fantasies and the fallacies, manages to embody a certain element special to mankind, adding meaning to the mélange of works as well as the lofty ambiguity of nature.

Share This Post!

"Maurizio Cattelan: All" at the Guggenheim. Photo Credit: David Heald.

On a chilly Sunday afternoon in December, I decided to indulge my curiosity regarding advertisements that had appeared on the subway featuring a man hanging by his clothes on a coat rack of sorts.

The advertisements were for Maurizio Cattelan‘s exhibition: “Maurizio Cattelan: All.”  I found the title to be a bit vague out of context, and I did not understand why such a title would be chosen until I arrived at the exhibit itself. There to greet me was a giant installation of sculpted art that hung from the oculus of the museum.  According to the mobile platform application that accompanies the exhibit, the massive hanging installation “is comprised of every piece of art that Maurizio Cattelan has ever made.” That, along with the fact that Cattelan has announced his retirement from the art world alongside the unveiling of this exhibition, makes “All” a more than fitting title.

The unique architecture of the Guggenheim makes it the perfect place for Cattelan’s work to be displayed. The giant web of sculpted art fills the entire space, and stretches all the way from the bottom floor to the top, with a dead horse a mere few feet above patrons on the ground floor.  From an absurdly elongated pool table placed in the middle of the colossal hanging pillar-web of art, to a tree placed in a cube of dirt near the ground floor, “All” comprises a broad spectrum of Cattelan’s installation work, and is bound together by horse-themed art installations as well as Tourists, the original form of which is comprised of pigeons sitting in the rafters of the gallery it was displayed in. These pigeons now reside on the art itself, and can be found everywhere within the sculpture, cleverly placed on the gigantic metal framework.

After taking the time to browse the iPhone application at one of the “App Stations” throughout the museum, I took another look at the installation and thought, “there’s no way this could possibly be EVERY piece of art this man has ever made!” What really convinced me was one of the books that was written on the exhibit, which is also placed in sets of two around the museum’s walking spiral. There are actual over one hundred installations included in the sculpture, and when you take into account that his installations often included more than one piece of art, the number of total pieces skyrockets.

However, the most mind-blowing part is simply the presentation. Many of the pieces seemed incredibly heavy, and yet looked so delicate while hanging by white cords from the metal framework above. I believe that the white chord that was chosen to hang the pieces of art was a deliberate choice, as it forces one to walk along the spiral in order to view all of the pieces. It also adds an extra level to the work, and makes it feel much more intricate and otherworldly. It also establishes a firm base for the works as one single installation, and not hundreds of art pieces cobbled together. Everything feels as if it came together, cosmically, instead of being cobbled together. It is a feast for the eyes in several ways.

The side galleries at the Guggenheim were quite interesting as well. There were two sets of galleries devoted to pop-art, a gallery devoted to a private collection of classical art (which even presented two works by Picasso, as well as a Van Gogh work), a gallery comprised of flat color works, and a gallery focused on a single work called Painting with White Border, which was in many ways the 2-Dimensional version of “All”. The entire painting is a compilation of abstract motifs of various paintings done by the artist who created White Border, with a milky-white wave surrounding half of the painting, much as the spiral of the Guggenheim surrounds “All”.

All in all (pun intended), the Guggenheim has presented yet another compelling set of works. Although there are works in the side-galleries that I would love to describe, I can only say that with all great works of art, from massive installations to fifteen-inch paintings, seeing is believing.

“Maurizio Cattelan: All” will be on display until January 22, 2012.  Get your 2-for-$5 Guggenheim passes now through High 5!

Share This Post!

Darcy James Argue's Secret Society in Brooklyn Babylon. Photo Credit: Rahav Segev.

Brooklyn Babylon, performed at the Brooklyn Academy of Music by Darcy James Argue’s Secret Society in collaboration with graphic novelist Danijel Zezelj featured live music, animation, and live painting. The show open with music played by musicians dressed like street urchins from Elizabethan England. They performed a number, which was followed by Danijel Zezelj appearing on a platform in the background. He went to the center of this platform, picked up a roller and began painting. A few minutes after he started, a screen came down between him and the audience and animations started to play on it. These animations told a story of the building of the Tower of Brooklyn which was to be the tallest tower in the world. The story was told from the point of view of an old man and his grand-daughter. The old man was a carousel builder and the mayor had commissioned him to build one for the top of the tower. He did as the mayor had asked of him but he noticed that some of the little girl’s favorite places were destroyed to make room for the tower, one of them being a cafe that she loved. The old man noticed how sad this made her, so he decided to give her a surprise.

When the tower was finished and the carousel installed, the old man and the little girl were the first to ride it. The carousel started to spin at a regular speed but it slowly started spinning faster and faster until it flew off of the top of the tower. When the carousel was airborne a parachute device came out of the top of it. It flew through the air until it finally landed in Coney Island. Once there, a group of people ran to it and started to work on it. When they finished the carousel had become the cafe that had been destroyed during the tower’s construction.

As the animation was projected, the musicians played and gave the story feeling. They played slow calm music during parts of the animation that showed the actual construction of the tower, and fast panicky music during suspenseful parts, like when the carousel started spinning off of the tower. There were breaks in the animation where Danijel Zezelj could be seen painting on a long white canvas. The final picture he drew was of the tower itself from a view that was not shown during the animation. All the different parts of this performance went together perfectly. Each element supported the others, creating a whole experience that was greater than the individual parts.

Share This Post!

"Maurizio Cattelan: All" at the Guggenheim. Photo Credit: Chang W. Lee

How much do we trust amusements parks and museums with our lives?

Share This Post!

The Last Newspaper. Photo Credit: The Lo-Down NY

The Last Newspaper featured at the New Museum was a running metaphor. Just about everywhere you turn there was yet another piece waiting to be deciphered. One I found particularly interesting was one by Adam McEwen, where he wrote an obituary for Caster Semenya a South African middle-distance runner and champion. During the article I questioned the importanc,  though moving, I didn’t see the fit in the exhibition. Moving through, I was not so moved by a piece that had newspaper articles of Saddam Hussein and glitter on top of the articles glued by an unruly substance. Though I admire the dedication from the curator of this exhibition, I was continually confused by the pieces chosen to illuminate the metaphor. When I thought I could not get any more confused, I did. As I walked in to the second part of the exhibition, I thought I walked into a newspaper factory with random people working on their computers. Was that part of the exhibition? Their office? All I can say about this exhibition was when I was not beside myself with confusion I was feeling a sort of dull dead like vibe. Though I am not sure if this was on purpose the exhibition was dull and dead kind of like a newspaper was that suppose to be the profound metaphor of the exhibition or a complete and utter accident? Would I recommend going to this exhibition? Maybe, confusion is a fundamental part of art, allowing someone to make their own opinions instead of laying it out right in front of them which many exhibitions do. Please take the time and find your own opinions on this exhibition, because trust me your mind could go just about anywhere.

Share This Post!

Van Cleef & Arpels 1952 Diamond Zip Necklace. Photo Credit: Tino Hammid.

“Everything that shines aint always gonna be gold”. –Kid Cudi

It could be diamonds, rubies, emeralds, or sapphires. Van Cleef and Arples is one of the world’s most renown jewelry empires. As you walk into the grand hall of the Cooper Hewitt museum, you are stunned by the majestic beauty surrounding you. The exhibit is filled with breathtaking jewelry dating back to the early 1900’s. The exhibit is divided into different parts: innovation, transformations, and nature as inspiration.

Innovation was how the jewelry was created, the many hours of workmanship that went into making perfection. Transformation was how one piece could form multiple pieces. For instance, a single emerald necklace could be broken apart to form a pair of bangles, and earnings,  thus creating a piece that was versatile in many different aspects. Van Cleef and Arples used the inspiration of nature throughout their pieces. Whether it be a delicate gold vine, with diamond droplets, or a bulky bodacious beetle; the company had a way of enhancing nature.

There are several rooms that divide the exhibit; every room amplifies the jewelry in its own way. The light is different in each of the rooms, which allows the gems to shine to its fullest potential. Although the exhibit is breathtaking, the use of excessive technology takes away from it. As you enter the room you are offered an iPad which guides you through the exhibit. It not only takes away from the beauty of the pieces, but it interferes with the lighting in the room. My younger brother spent more time playing with the iPad, then gazing at the beauty of the pieces. Although it’s common to mix traditional art with technology in modern exhibits, it takes away from the allure of the workmanship.

My favorite piece was a diamond encrusted choker that was worn by the beautiful Grace Kelly. The distinctive detail and intricate enamel brought the piece to life. All in all, the exhibit was marvelous. Fashion can come and go, but to sustain style that was sculpted a hundred years ago is a skill.

Share This Post!