In which I pretend to be an art critic.

One of the best things about summer in the city is the vast amount of spare time I have to go to various museums that I am too busy to go to during the school year, and was too distracted by other things to go to last summer. Unfortunately, unlike in DC, they are not free, but whatever…that’s what working out a budget is for.

So there are two exhibits I went to…one at the New Museum and one at the Met that were very similar in their concepts, except the one at the Met was TERRIBLE and the New Museum one was worth my $8.

The New Museum had an exhibit (now gone) called The Generational: Younger than Jesus which featured young artists under the age of 33 from all around the world, and their art which dealt with social issues facing people born since 1976.  It was very high concept I suppose, as someone described it, but even though it was modern art utilizing different mediums (one installation was a lady in a bed) and on the surface some of the pieces could have come across as someone just throwing together a bunch of crap and calling it “Modern Art” (as is the stereotype) at least there was adequate explanation of the artists’ background and statement so that the viewer could at least understand that the artist had a legitimate point…and the art generally did look like the artist had made some sort of effort.

On the other hand….the Met had an exhibit called The Pictures Generation and it was completely ridiculous.  A lot of the art was just advertisements that the artist had altered in some small way, magazine cut outs…it wasn’t even as if these were collages…it was like someone saw an ad they liked…took words from another ad and glued them together. The worst example were baby shoes an artist had bought with the intention of using them in a piece, but ended up selling them instead. And this was not a famous artist either. How is buying shoes art? Seriously…I am entertained by most exhibitions but I just don’t understand art where the artists has made essentially zero effort and has created something with no purpose in mind and something that somebody without any talent could do. I should add that the museum did not include much explanation on what the intent of these artists were (unless I somehow managed to miss it), aside from “being affected by modern things” or whatever. Wow. So am I.

Sorry people. Dadaist art already happened, please don’t try to recreate it.

Anyway, the Model as Muse exhibition, also at the Met, was 348732894723894 times better and everyone should go see that. They were really creative with their mannequins and have a lot of information on influential designers, photographers and models.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s