Collecting Air Miles While You See Your Favourite Picasso

I’ll never forget the first time I realised I truly loved art, it was the time I decided to go to a particular country purely to see one particular piece of art work in one particular art gallery.  Yes, it was a year ago that I decided to go to Madrid to see Picasso’s Guernica.  The incident was incredibly eye opening and also culminated in the start of this blog- so lets just say it was more than pretty momental.  Travelling and art are two of my greatest passions, so it makes sense to combine the pair. Whilst I’m eternally content with the unique and vast art scene in London, I am always searching for my next European adventure. I’ve comprised a list below of my top five modern art works to visit in their counterpart European City.  Who needs an excuse to go on holiday, when you can go see art?

Rachel’s Top 5 European Modern Art Pilgrimages:

*Spain: Madrid

AKA Picasso, Paella & Parraletta

WHAT? Pablo Picasso: Guernica (1937)

WHERE? The Reina Sofia, Madrid (www.museoreinasofia.es/en)

AND? In 1937, Picasso, shaken and shocked by the terror of the bombings of the Spanish town in the Basque region created Guernica to be shown at the Spanish Pavilion at the International Exhibition in Paris. The painting, as a plea against the general horrors evoked by the Spanish Civil War, quickly came to stand as a general emblem for the Spanish cause. The black and white newspaper finish to the picture can be seen as a homage to Picasso’s first reading about the bombing through the French newspaper, L’Humanité. The allusion to this devastation is rendered powerful in the painting with the twisted broken bodies, the fallen soldiers, children and animals, the reference to ‘bombilla’, or bomb, and the daggers. All those atrocities are made more unimaginably poignant by its very size, 3.5 metres tall, by 7.8 metres wide. This piece is as powerful as it is emotive, be prepared to be shocked, and to spend a lot of time hanging around it.

ALSO ENJOY? When in Spain, hot weather, sangria, tapas and free entry to the other two major museums that complete the ‘golden triangle’ in Madrid, the Prado and the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum

PRICE? A LOT cheaper than London (A weekend for two, around £300 for flights and accommodation)

 

**The Netherlands: Amsterdam

AKA Van Gogh, Vondel Park & Viagra

WHAT? Van Gogh: Self Portrait (1887)

WHERE? The Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en)

AND? Vincent Van Gogh was a post-Impressionist painter of Dutch origin whose works, notable for its rough beauty, emotional honesty and bold colour, had a far-reaching influence on 20th-century art.  Ever wondered why he did so many self-portraits? He couldn’t afford to pay a model! After being told by his brother, Theo, about the new revolutionary, colourful style of French painting, Impressionism, Van Gogh moved to Paris in 1886. A year later he was to complete this piece, using rhythmic brushstrokes in striking colours.   Here, he portrays himself as a well-styled Parisian, and thus his exposure to Impressionism becomes incredibly clear, highlighted further by his interest in colour and dramatic brushwork.

ALSO ENJOY? Cycles around the city, lounging in parks and plenty of smokes and pancakes. While in Amsterdam, also go to the Van Gogh and the Stedelijk Museum

PRICE? Cheaper than London (A weekend for two, with flights and accommodation, £350)

 

***France: Paris

AKA Delaunay, Disco’s & Disaproving Looks

WHAT? Robert Delaunay: L’Équipe de Cardiff (1912)

WHERE? The Museum of Modern Art- The City of Paris  (http://www.mam.paris.fr/en)

AND? In 1912 Delaunay began the first of several versions of The Cardiff Team. The motif derived from a newspaper photograph of a Cardiff-Paris rugby match, which showed players jumping for the ball. Delaunay added Paris’s famous Ferris wheel and an Astra billboard, which advertises an aircraft construction company. The letters on the hoarding to the right derive from the artist’s own name. The Eiffel Tower features in many of Delaunay’s paintings, as the artist regarded it as the archetypal symbol of modernity. It is here seen emerging above the fragment of his name.  The painting is bright and fun, it points to futurism via movement, modernity and dynamism.

ALSO ENJOY? Fine dining and even finer wine in the City of Love.  While you’re here, why not also check out the Pompidou, the Louvre at the Orsay?

PRICE? On a par with London (Weekend for two, with Eurostar and hotel, £450)

 

****Norway: Oslo

AKA Munch, moodiness & melodies

WHAT? Edvard Munch: The Scream (1893)

WHERE? The National Museum of Art, Architecture & Design, Oslo (www.nasjonalmuseet.no/en/)

AND? Scream was painted in 1893 during a transitional period in art history, following the end of the photographic and before the Expressionists and other artists of the early twentieth century made it a trend to put a focus on the expression of their inner feelings and emotions through their art.  What makes Munch one of the most interesting artists to come out of modern art, is that he shows us a glimpse of his inner troubles and feelings of anxiety through his painting. He therefore puts more importance on personal meaning than on technical skill or “beauty,” a traditional goal of art.  It was painted the same year his sister was diagnosed with insanity, and It was painted using oil and pastel on cardboard. It is incredibly frightening and powerful.

ALSO ENJOY? Relax around the lakes, enjoy the breath-taking Opera House, and be prepared to fork out for a pint of beer! In terms of art, The Office for Contemporary Art and the Munch Museum, an entire museum dedicated to the artist himself, are essentials.

PRICE? MORE expensive than London! (Weekend for two with flights and hotel accommodation, £500)

 

*****Austria: Vienna

AKA Klimt, Kisses & The Konzerthaus

WHAT? Gustav Klimt: The Kiss (1908)

WHERE? The Austrian Gallery Belvedere, Vienna (www.belvedere.at/en)

AND?The painting is easily Klimt’s most famous work, and holds particular strength in the History of Art.  Completed in Vienna, where it still resides today, the painting depicts a couple kissing in a style that is both geometric but at the same time realistic.  This particular kiss occupied Klimt throughout his career and became the subject of numerous works.  There have been numerous attempts to identify the woman portrayed in The Kiss. Those mentioned have included Klimt’s life-long partner Emilie Flöge, but also Adele Bloch-Bauer. The subject’s well-proportioned facial features reveal a similarity to many of the women that Klimt portrayed, but ultimately they cannot be unequivocally attributed to a particular person.  Finally, what makes the technique of the work so unique, is its incorporation of a gold leaf on canvas, rather than simply a classic oil on canvas.

ALSO ENJOY? A Viking tour, some apple strudel and a visit the State Opera for a show.  Why not also visit the Museum of Modern art and the Museum of Fine Arts!

PRICE? Cheaper than London! (Weekend for two with flights and hotel accommodation, £400)

 

Provocative Performance Artist Reenacts Gustave Courbets ‘The Origin of the World’ By Displaying Her Own Vagina

Just as I was beginning to despair with the recent ‘attention seeking’ acts of performance art, one young artist comes along and changes all that.  YES, Deborah de Robertis constitutes a piece of performance art work that directly plays with and challenges Gustave Courbet’s ‘The Origins of the World’.  Indeed if we are aware of the incredibly racy nature of Courbet’s 1866 painting we can only imagine the provocative nature of the act that this performance artist undergoes.  If you weren’t aware, and as the title makes clear the painting references to the beginning of human life, the place where it all starts.  It is a portrait of the female genitalia.  Whilst the painting was seen as a great scandal at the time, today we recognise it an artistic treasure uniting themes such as realism, romance, eroticism and voyerism.  It’s an incredibly powerful piece, it disturbs just as it incites.

Last week de Robertis, draped in a short gold sequin dress, entered ironically, rather inconspicuously into Room 20 of the Musée d’Orsay.  She placed herself boldly and un-ashamedly directly in front of the Courbet masterpiece, but at the same time, she gave nothing away.  A few seconds later she opens her legs revealing her womanhood.  It is as raw as it is intense, and at the same time rather too easy to watch given the brashness of her display.  But what is it about this piece of performance art that allows it to stand so far from other more recent contemporary pieces?

Before you go any further, check out the video of the performance here: *high sexual content ALERT* http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1yaxll_une-artiste-expose-son-sexe-sous-l-origine-du-monde_news

There was something incredibly raw and emotional about her performance, surpassing the so called ‘aesthetics of beauty’ that the History of Art proclaims to, pushing her performance one step ahead.  It is a declaration of a message about women by women to women, to men and to society.  Did you know that in the 1990’s, less than 5% of the artists in the Modern Art section of New York’s Metropolitan Museum were women, but 85% of the nudes were female?

As always the most frustrating and often most entertaining part of reading articles like these is the sprawl of comments made by the great public.  One ‘top commenter’ AKA a Carol Dixson naively says ‘I’m guessing about half the population in the world has one. Hers is special? This “artist” needs to get over herself.’  It is comments (attitudes) like this that seems to disregard  the powerful message behind the act of performance art.  If you don’t like it that is fine, but with conceptual art, with performance art, it’s more the message or concept behind it that becomes the most powerful.  I don’t think those gallery-goers or indeed the security staff at the Orsay will forget about this incident for a long time.  And why should they?

Who knew that a vagina that in art is so treasured, becomes so disturbing and hated in real life? Talk about hypocrisy!

Despite the much despised custom that the French adhere to move things at a very glacial pace, it still didn’t take long before De Robertis was removed by security staff.  She has been handed over to the police who have the power to charge her with sexual exhibitionism.

But De Robertis justifies her performance.  ‘If you ignore the context, you could construe this performance as an act of exhibitionism, but what I did was not an impulsive act,” she explained to Luxemburger Wort. “There is a gap in art history, the absent point of view of the object of the gaze. In his realist painting, the painter shows the open legs, but the vagina remains closed. He does not reveal the hole, that is to say, the eye. I am not showing my vagina, but I am revealing what we do not see in the painting, the eye of the vagina, the black hole, this concealed eye, this chasm, which, beyond the flesh, refers to infinity, to the origin of the origin.’

I couldn’t agree more with the brave young woman and neither it seems did the surprised gallery-goers who were quick to applaud her performance.  Why call her brave? She believed in promoting her own message so much that she sacrificed her own position and persona to do so.  Displays of sexual exhibitionism in such a public place like the Musée D’Orsay are going to get you arrested. Yes she broke the law, yes the performance was extremely sexually explicit and yes it came with absolutely NO warning, but this was the very beauty of it! And there is something incredibly powerful and beautiful about her performance. It’s funny how quickly the public go a-wall when a woman’s genitalia is involved.

Last time I checked almost 50% of the population have a vagina, and the other 50% are no stranger to them, so why the outcry? Does it take a nude performance artist disrupting a casual day of museum revelry to make the world notice? Apparently so…

Would you steal a Picasso? Why we can’t hate art thieves

During my morning ritual trawling the Guardian’s art section, I came along an article about art thieves by my favourite art critic, Jonathan Jones.  We probably picture the typical art thief rather glamourously, motivated by money and picking a piece only for the high price it will reach on the black market.  It is unlikely that said thief will be aware of what the the thick brush stroke, open composition and the emphasis on the depiction of light comes to represent, in the impressionist piece that he takes without love from the walls of the gallery.  Clearly the work is of unimportance to them, so we should take it away from the situation.  He is thus a thief.   And this same thief is perhaps the worst kind, taking away works of art from the ever longing  and demanding gaze of the public eye.  I will not sympathise with this man.

The case of Patrick Vialaneix is albeit more tricky to decipher.  Earlier in 2014, he shocked the art world by confessing to stealing from a museum in Cannes in 1999, ‘Child with a Soap Bubble’, a painting believed to be one of Rembrandt’s. It is not a Rembrandt, it is only in a similar style, but that is not the point.  Unlike your standard art thief, he didn’t sell the piece, nor was he ever motivated by his desire to profit from the piece (until an ironic twist at the end- when he has been connected to an attempt to sell the piece).  But, let us put that aside, what matters is that originally, the only thing  Vialanieux was motivated by- was his love for art.  In some ways, I can’t blame the man.

In other ways- I can.  I’m sure I speak for other art lovers when I say that there is nothing that would be more thrilling, than owning our favourite piece of art work.  An art work that is so precious to the public and to the art world, yet hangs exclusively in our own living room.  It is kind of the dream right? That’s exactly it, it’s a pretty warped fantasy, one that we’d prefer would stay just that.

If given the opportunity and knowing you would get away with it, would you steal a work of art from a museum? If so, what piece would you choose? If I could own just one piece it would be Van Gogh’s ‘Portrait de l’artiste au chevalet’ (1889), housed at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam.  That doesn’t mean I’d ever steal it though. Art should be looked at and shared, and having it hidden in my own house, with my heart stopping every time the door rings, is not my idea of fun.  Art is fun, and so this reduces its everyday meaning.

Whilst Vialaneix is a thief, he stole because he loved a piece of art so much he wanted it all to himself. I can understand that, but under no circumstance do I sympathise with him.  Art is made by the people and is for the people.  Taking the piece away from the art world compromises art history and culture, and there is something quite sinister in allowing that. The spectator deciphers the creative process, and so we should not deny the spectator, the piece or even the artist, that freedom, that joy.

Like always, I’ll leave you with a little Duchamp, a little comment on the role of the spectator in the interpretation and lasting importance of art.

‘The artist exists only if he is known…..The artist makes something, then one day, he is recognised by the intervention of the public, of the spectator; so later he goes onto posterity’

Fuck Bitches, Get Monet

These days, I find my life more continuously filled with research for the ever-looming dissertation deadline.  Since my dissertation takes the approaches of humour and the notion of the joke and examines Duchamp’s penchant for both of these in the revolutionising of the contemporary arts, I have found myself more willing to do just that, to laugh at the facade of art.

I found these images on the web, and despite proclaiming a love for art history, they did make me laugh.  Sometimes the only way to keep modern art going is to respond to what culture wants.  What culture wants is a quick image, something witty and something cool. These ‘memes’ certainly help to revive interest in modern masters, so what’s the problem?

Art should never be boring!

 

Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris

I have been wanted to visit The Museum of Modern Art since the day I first arrived in Paris. Two months later, on a sunny afternoon, the girls and I finally made the pilgrimage to one of the best collections of 20^th and 21^st century art this side of the Pont d’Alma.

The Museum of Modern Art, best know as, La Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Parisboasts one of the best locations in Paris, nestled in the 16^th arrondissement, along the Seine.  Over the years, the museum has become one of 14 City of Paris’ Museums, a group of museums that since January 2013, has become a public institution. The museum is free for everyone and is devoid of the pretentious aspects that we are often so accustomed to within modern art exhibitions.  In fact there is a real sense of freedom within the museum.  There are no rules regarding photography, noise or behaviour, and this encourages a sort of interaction which I belief is so crucial for spectators when engaging with art.  The space of the museum is incredible with the white walls, the open spaces and the natural light that comes through.

Alain Patrick

Daniel Spoerri

Nam June Paik

Albert Gleizes

The calibre of works on display in the museum’s permanent display is outstanding. There is a real mix between work by old masters such as Picasso and Di Chirico, and more contemporary artists.  While a chronologic approach to exhibition design is often frowned upon in terms of modern art, I believe that this element is so in fitting with what the museum represents.  We pass rooms featuring anti-art, and then two minutes later find ourselves stumbling past the room dedicated to Dadaism or Surrealism.  We also see a variety of work from artists such as Gleizes, Braque, Picabia, Di Chiricio, Rauschenberg, Klein, Giacometti, Fautrier , Roualt and Bellmer.

Di Chirico

Di Chirico

Fautrier

Bonnard

Picabia

None of these artists had as much impact on me as Robert Delaunay. Delaunay, along with his wife and fellow artist, Sonia, cofounded the art movement Orphism, well known for its fascination with geometric shapes and vivid colours. The selection of work by these artists on display here are vast and incredibly fitting with the museum’s focus on Paris as a City.  As we enter the room where works by these orphists are on display, we pass Delaunay’s Eiffel Tower (1911), and at the same time catch sight of the real Eiffel Tower, lurking just in front, through the window in the museum. It is pretty magical. But my favourite work of Delaunay’s has to be L’Equipe de Cardiff (the Cardiff rugby team) (1913).  I have been studying this piece for years, so being able to see it up close was incredible. The colours were as intense as the shapes were geometric, but nothing was more surprising than the very size of it!

The Museum of Modern art is one of those rare gems, that is sadly overlooked by tourists or locals who prefer to prioritise the Orsay or the Louvre.  For me, The Museum of Modern Art, almost rivals the Pompidou. That is a BIG statement, and one that I suggest you decipher for yourself!  It’s free, it’s interactive and it’s right in the heart of Paris. For art lovers, what is not to love?

Yesterday, as part of our masters course, we were lucky enough to be taken on a tour of Rodin’s gardens by our professor, Peter Read. Situated amongst Ivalides and Ecole Militaire, the gardens are an idyllic three hectares in size and boast some of Rodin’s most famous sculptures such as The Thinker, The Kiss and The Gates of Hell. Unfortunately, on the day we visited, the museum was closed, but this was really of no consequence given the astounding beauty of the gardens. Rodin’s sculptures appear so content among the vast gardens, with the water fountains and the tall tree’s. This somehow serves to make his sculptures even more poignant, astounding, but at the same time, accessible.

There is something so powerful about sculpture. It evokes an immediate visual impact from spectators but also evolves over time. It thus boasts a status as an artwork that is both spacial and temporal. The sculpture of Auguste Rodin demands attention both in the iconic reputation of his work and its commitment to abstraction and moving forward, but also in the message that Rodin leaves us with.

Rodin (1840-1917) had, as any famous artist has or had, a great story to his work. The reputation he would go on to gain would not have been foreseen so clearly during his early life. Rodin was born to a life of rags. He was rejected three times by the famous art school in Paris, L’Ecole Des Beaux Arts, which out of frustration, led him to become an architectural plasterer. It was this course of path that really allowed the sculptor to develop and practice his technique. It wasn’t until he was thirty six years old that Rodin finally exhibited his first sculpture. He exhibited L’Age de Bronze in clay at the annual Salon in 1876. Yet The Age of Bronze, a 6ft clay sculpture modelled on a soldier, was to create scandal rather than success. Art at that time was supposed to idealize the human form and represent the canon of beauty that was biblical or mythical. Instead, The Age of Bronze too deeply referenced realism, and the idea of kinetic art.

For me, the real beauty about Rodin’s work is his ability to make art that moves. In The Age of Bronze, movement is represented in the thoughtful pose of the soldier and the upward lift of his hand. It is clear the Rodin was looking toward Michaelangelo’s Slave sculptures for inspiration. But why was this notion of movement so crucial to Rodin? Rodin was living and working during the Age of great progress. The Age of great progress can be seen as a renewal in faith in human progress and humanity that was reflected in a number of reforms. Primary education becoming compulsory under the third republic is one of many examples.

Yet this idea of a renewed sense of faith was unfortunately not tapped upon by critics of Rodin’s work who were quick to accuse The Age of Bronze of being made out of cast. It’s obvious difference from other sculptures at the Salon, was proof of it as a fraud. The only way that Rodin could respond to the critics, a move that would eventually silence and gain support, was to create his next sculpture.

Rodin’s John the Baptist Preaching sculpture in 1879 could never be accused of being a fraud. The two metre high sculpture encompassed a rough surface that allowed vitality and light to be added to the sculpture, elements that would not be captured so powerfully had it been given a smooth surface. This focus on the play of light as a key element was not particularly new, given that the Impressionists during the 1860’s were also divulging the energy and beauty that light gave to their work. John the Baptist Preaching would help Rodin to hone his personal style by incorporating a sense of earthy realism, variegated surface and a sort of raised feeling to his sculptures.

This was not the only iconic thing about his work. Rodin’s commitment to subjects that featured well known images and tales such as Dante’s Inferno, Balzac and of course, John the Baptist allowed a sense of immediate understanding and resonance amongst the public with regard to his sculptures. Yet, like any truly iconic artist, he was to break with the traditional to favour a more dynamic and daring energy.

The creation of The Kiss in 1887 in Chicago was no exception. The Kiss was based on Dante’s Inferno, the story of Paolo and Francesco, but its nature was deemed too outrageous. It was seen as too shocking and removed from the main exhibition, to a private room where spectators had to apply for special permissions to view it. The shocking nature of the sculpture is not apparent within the kiss itself, nor the intertwining of the nudes, but instead the concern is highlighted within the figure of the female who appears to pertain to an equal sexual desire and confidence to that of the male. At a time, when the control and power came from the male, the balance between the sexes was incredibly disturbing.

The work of Rodin’s assistant slash lover, Camille Claudel, is also at display in the Rodin museum, testimony I believe to the respect he had for those of the opposite sex. However, the unforeseen closure of the museum yesterday acted as a blessing in disguise. I was more than content with a wander around the gardens. Every sculpture beckons your attention and imagination to such an extent that we attempt to align with the mind of Rodin. The exploration leaves us pondering the immensity of sculptures such as the famous Thinker or the incredibly intricate and frightening Gates of Hell. The gardens are well worth a visit, and I plan on visiting again in the summer, alongside the house. If you are really into your sculptures and have plenty of time in Paris, plan on visiting the garden and the museum on separate occasions. With over 6000 sculptures and 8000 drawings, the experience is incredibly intense and overwhelming. You cannot leave Paris without seeing it!

In England, most town halls are used for council meetings or for the odd elderly bake sale. Not in Paris. It’s most famous town hall, L’Hotel de Ville in the Marais, finds itself transformed in a reflection of the city of lights by the famous photographer, Brassaï. Born in Hungary in 1899, Brassaï was one of the most famous contemporary photographers of all time, accumulating a great body of work that illustrated a real fascination with the City of Paris. He was to deal with all walks of life in Paris, from prostitutes to intellectuals, and in doing so would uncover a more mythical darker side of Paris, that he loved as much as he did its more famous affiliation.

In 1924 Brassaï moved to Paris and quite soon find himself being introduced to those like Desnos and Prévert and others responsible for the start of the Annees Folles, based in Montparnasse. In 1929, when he began his photography he had been introduced to the world of the Surrealists. This transformation of the real into the surreal and the focus on the unconscious that was advocated by Surrealism would be crucial for Brassaï’s earlier work. Here he sought to capture a side of Paris that was rarely shown, if not hated. He would wander around Paris by night using some of the night time light to capture photographs of prostitutes and workers and of bridges and graveyards. Although perhaps not recognised at the time, he would present a side to Paris that united the classic architecture of Paris, with the beauty of the fog, silhouettes and lights, while at the same time representing a moment in time, that was often forgotten in favour of beautiful day time scenes.

A few years later, in 1932, Brassaï began to focus on the Circus within his photography, that was inspired by a close relationship with Picasso, who had worked together previously and shared a love of the circus atmosphere. A tireless wanderer of night-time Paris, Brassaï also had an eye for the capital in daylight. For example, he offered an intensely personal view of the Jardin du Luxembourg and the banks of the Seine, which he strolled along in search of young lovers, fishermen, the homeless, or even dogs. He also took a keen interest in the elegant Rue de Rivoli crowd, bystanders in front of shops on the Grands Boulevards, and many others…

This exhibition runs until the 18th March, and boasts free entry. Be prepared to queue for at least an hour and a half. Despite this, the exhibition is well worth visiting, presenting a rather underrepresented and mysterious side of Paris.

Le Surréalisme et l’Objet

Le Centre Pompidou

In the two months since I last posted, I’ve been busy submitting essays and have made the big move to Paris. I am finally all settled into my lovely new apartment close to Pere Lachaise and am ready to explore all the art that this City has to offer. I hope I can take you on a journey from the more mainstream and tourist friendly museums such as the Louvre, the Musee d’Orsay and the Palais Tokyo, to the smaller more intimate galleries like La Maison Rouge and the Marian Goodman Gallery.

An exhibition whose arrival I have been anticipating since I first decided I was moving to Paris back last June is Le Surréalisme et l’objet, at the Centre Pompidou. I was pretty thrilled when it was announced that this exhibition was to form a trip as part of our University Schedule. For anyone that knows me, the Surrealist art movement, is without a shadow of a doubt my favourite art movement within the history of Modern Art. From Breton to Dali and to my main man Marcel Duchamp, anything slightly surreal from automatic drawing to Cadavre Equis really gets my creative juices flowing.  

Joan Miro- Tete Humaine (1931)

Hans Bellemer- Poupee (dolls series)

This exhibition did absolutely nothing to disappoint the high hopes I had placed on it. In fact, it pretty much encompassed everything I believe to be crucial to the Surrealist sentiment. Whilst we know that after World War two the Surrealist group had almost totally dismembered, we were perhaps not aware of its legacy on modern object art today. This is what the exhibition makes so apparent. While a strong focus on the work of Breton, Man Ray, Dali, Duchamp, Aragon and Éluard, there is also a focus on the work of more modern day Surrealist artists such as Paul McCarthy and Ed Ruscha. 

Paul McCarthy

Ed Ruscha

What was so crucial to the Surrealists was the desire to liberate oneself from rationality, allowing us to access our unconscious and reach a state of surreality, a higher reality. Reality and the dreamlike and rationality and the unconscious are valued equally so that we can reach our true state. This is why this exhibition was given a non-chronological curation. Favouring a chronological path way could be deemed to be too anti-surrealist and thus hypocritical to the very nature of the exhibition. The curators here have really understood how Breton and the other surrealists favoured the display of their work. This is further alluded to in the rooms dedicated to showing past Surrealist exhibitions, the 1942 First Papers in New York and the 1938 International Surrealist Exhibition, in Paris. These exhibitions were both curated by Marcel Duchamp and were fundamentally revolutionary given the bizarre off the wall curation and the art works on display. Please see my other blog posts for further analysis of Duchamp’s work for the Surrealists.

Breton- Objets Fonctionemments Symboliques (1931)

Man Ray- Champs Delicieux (1922)

Salvador Dali- Telephone Homard (aphrodisiaque) (1936)

Salvador Dali- Objets Surrealistes

What this exhibition has been criticised for is the lack of extra reading available to spectators. Whilst there are occasional screens projecting information, little is given away in the information cards that accompany the artworks. In fact, we have to wait until we reach the book shop located by the exit to the exhibition if we want to skim through the dictionary of Surrealist objects, the official guide to the exhibition. Stopping myself from buying it was incredibly challenging. However the lack of guide within the exhibition wasn’t a problem for me, as I felt totally in my element within the exhibition space. Even for those with little understanding of Surrealism, I believe the lack of information provided would only work in their favour. This goes back to the fundamental beliefs and aims of those rather mysterious Surrealists who gave little a way. Key to accessing the unconscious was the need to escape the constraint of rational thought and enter into this dream like state. Surely this is what this exhibition aims to do? Force the spectator into an environment where they are free to liberate their own unconscious, that has not been constrained by rational thought (a coherent and information proofed exhibition) ? It thus liberates the viewer allowing them to take on without knowing, the notion of what it is to be a Surrealist.

Joan Miro- Femme et Oiseau (1967)

Max Ernst- Moonman (1944)

The Surrealist exhibition runs at the Pompidou until the 3rd March.  Entry is around thirteen euro and also includes access to the Modern Art Museum located on the second floor.  It is well worth a visit to both, plus you can take really cool photos like this

A truly surreal playground in the heart of London

Lutz Bacher: Black Beauty, at the Institute of Contemporary Arts

The American artist Lutz Bacher chooses the ICA for her first major solo exhibition in the UK, and so  her creative play field becomes open to all. The ICA is the second destination for Bacher, whose Black Beauty exhibition is taking on a trio of exciting European destinations this year.  Black Beauty has  already been displayed at the Portikus in Frankfurt, and which will go on to be displayed at the Kunsthalle in Zurich in November, after its installation here in London. Yet neither of these galleries, have succeeded in fulfilling the aspirations of Bacher quite like that of the ICA.

The other exhibitions going on at the ICA appear inferior to the work of Lutz, which consumes the upper and lower galleries.   Lutz sound, sculpture and film appear in perfect harmony with the mission of the ICA, that is the supporting of emerging talent and promoting radical art and culture.  The most defining part of the exhibition is thrust on us, right at the point of entrance into the gallery, where several tons of coal slag fill the entire lower gallery. Spectators are encouraged to walk through the space, a sensual and odd experience, which contains three bizarre objects; a broken mirror, a picture Lutz took of her husbands chest and finally a random metal object, placed upright. Strange in itself, yet it becomes even more abstract when paired with the sound work, Puck. Puck carries an audio recording of the character Puck from Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream, repeated on loops with varied pronunciations and emphases. What completes this part of the exhibition, the third element if you like, is the vibrating astroturf, Black Magic that runs along the length of the concourse in the lower gallery.

It seems hardly surprising that Lutz, as a contemporary artist, is engaging with the international art market so fluently. Since beginning her artistic journey in the seventies, she seems to utilise apparently disconnected information from popular culture and combine it with those from her own life. This means that her work often juggles the interchangeability between the human body, identity and sexuality, which we see through her physical use of images and objects. She brings together, and arranges separate and untied elements, providing new ways for them to interact. It is all about creating things out of the random and the bizarre, a concept that is certainly not new, but something attributable to Duchamp and his readymades, and often sadly overlooked today.

The enigmatic mixture of ideas that the revolutionary work of Bacher brings together are full of personal and philosophical significance and are frequently driven by tactical humour, highlighted by the work in the upper galleries. Chess, is a work that contains a large chess board made up of larger than life chess pieces, a cardboard cut out of Elvis himself, dinosaur figures and a bicycle wheel that no doubt makes reference to Duchamp and his readymades, a recurring interest in Lutzs’ work. In the background, the sound piece Elvis (2009), a looped audio work featuring Elvis Presley chimes in the background,in a way that is incredibly sensual and mesmerizing. It draws us in and dictates emotion and presence. This sound work completes the chess piece, and the collection feels like a journey to a mysterious world, a sort of mixture between Alice and Wonderland and the surrealist cinema world portrayed by René Clair.

In the final part of the exhibition, the installation taken from the film version of John le Carre Tinker, Tailor, Solider, Spy, explores Bachers unique interpretation of narratives. What is addressed here by the revolving wooden horse typical of a parasol, is a discussion of the diverse notions of language, art and space through representation. The eclectic mixture of ideas, objects and bodies, with the personal and the pop, are ‘things’ that are constantly relevant within the art world, but also with life itself.

Bacher is thus exploring the identity of humans through the human body, gender and sexuality. But what I admire most about Lutz, is her distance from her spectators, or the lack of voice she attaches to her work. Her work is ambiguous and mysterious, she would prefer we look at her work without dictation in order for us to develop our own attitudes towards it. She highlights and exposes the lack of discussion surrounding the ambiguity in present social codes that affect how we perceive ourselves, and others. Her work is humorous, mysterious and educational, but above all it is enchanting and enlightening, taking us on a personal journey that is shaped only by what our eye perceives and our reaction of our body and mind. Lutz’ exhibition is as revolutionary, as it is historically relevant, and as bizarre as it is so clear and obvious.

Black Beauty is a must see and runs at the ICA until the 17th November, with free entry.

Images  are courtesy of the artist and Galerie Buchholz, Cologne/Berlin, and, Greene Naftali Gallery, New York

xoxo

There’s No Such Thing as Bad Press…

The Saatchi Gallery

The Saatchi Gallery in London is one of my all time favourite contemporary art galleries simply because of the freedom and lack of pretence that it offers. Opened by Charles Saatchi in order to showcase his personal collection to the public in 1985, it now takes residence just off the Kings Road in the heart of Chelsea. In 2010, the Saatchi Gallery was given to us, the British public and so became the Museum of Contemporary Art for London. It is the only contemporary art museum of its size that boasts free entry, something that is enabled through its partnership with the art auction house, Phillips de Pury & Company. It’s a hot spot for all things modern, launching the careers of many unknown artists into their world famous counterparts, and has influenced British art, quickly becoming a legacy.

But with the great hanging art on the walls and the blow up installations, comes great displays of drama and controversy. And it’s fair to say that the Saatchi has attracted a great deal of criticism over the years, but its inconsistency appears to be its secret to success. In June of this year, its owner, the one and only Charles Saatchi, was caught by paparazzi choking his wife Nigella Lawson at a local restaurant in London. Despite the personal dramas and the very public controversies, we can’t forget what the Saatchi Gallery has given the art world since its doors first opened.

The gallery’s history starts with a fascination for U.S artists; the minimalism movement that included Donald Judd, and of course the Pop Art movement belonging to Andy Warhol. It showcased American art and artists for the first time in the UK, including but not limited to Jeff Koons. But its hasty abandonment of U.S art in favour of British Artists is arguably its greatest legacy. The Young British Artists pioneered by Damien Hirst in the late eighties at the playground of Saatchi HQ pioneered great british talent bringing them to the foreground of contemporary art. Rachel Whiteread, Tracey Emin, Gavin Turk and Jenny Saville are a few of these British artists who owe much of their success to the teachings and gallery space offered to them by Hirst and Saatchi. Whilst the collaboration between these two appeared on the surface to be the art dream, it was also the source of tension and quarrels between the pair. Hirst sums up his feelings on Charles Saatchi, ‘I’m not Charles Saatchi’s barrel-organ monkey … He only recognises art with his wallet … he believes he can affect art values with buying power, and he still believes he can do it.’

The theory behind Saatchi being more interested in art dealing than art collecting appears to take strength, outrunning his own history. After having bought the iconic piece ‘Shark’ by Hirst for £50,000, in 1991 he sold it for 7 million in 2004. It is with no surprise that David Lee can be quoted saying, ‘Charles Saatchi has all the hallmarks of being a dealer, not a collector. He first talks up the works and then sells them.’ But in 2004, a fire within the premises destroyed over 50 million pounds worth of Saatchi’s collection, burning a hole not only in his wallet, but also in the joy of his personal collection built up over the years. It included the highly controversial Tracey Emin piece, ‘Everyone I have Slept with 1963-95’, that becomes ironic in itself if one is aware of Emin’s relationship with the Saatchi Gallery! Greed, fire and scandal…it all happens at the Saatchi Gallery.

With the birth of the The Triumph of Painting exhibition, we learn that the year 2004 was clearly just that, the year of scandal. What better way to cause a media frenzy than a painting by Stella Vine of Princess Diana with blood dripping from her lips, entitled Hi Paul Can You Come Over? A couple of years later in 2006, it was clear that Saatchi had not learnt its lesson. The work of Dash Snows Fuck the Police which included the tool of the artist’s semen and Gerald Davis’ painting Monica which outright shows a woman giving a blow job, quickly grabbed the medias attention. The calls from the public and the media demanding that the artists’ work be placed in an adult-only room alongside parental guidance, meant that the Saatchi Gallery had once again grabbed the headlines.

At the heart of the erotic and the revolt, the Saatchi Gallery cannot help but play and challenge the viewer within its own space. When you visit the Saatchi you will be struck between the more playful and abstract art and that which is intended to strike and move, like the room filled with childhood portraits of modern tyrants, including Hitler and Stalin.  Check out Annie Kevin’s Dictator Portraits at Saatchi or online here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/20/annie-kevans-dictator-portraits-hitler-mao-mussolini-at-saatchi_n_3467284.html

Despite this, the Saatchi boasts a very notable philosophy. It’s goals include taking art that is often viewed as exclusive, and making it accessible to the mainstream, showcasing contemporary work that would otherwise not be showcased. Rebecca Wilson, the head of development at the gallery says, ‘The gallery’s guiding principle is to show what is being made now, the most interesting artists of today. It’s about drawing people’s attentions to someone who might be tomorrow’s Damien Hirst.’

And what could pertain more to opening up the publics eyes to art and aiding the struggling artist than the open-access section on the gallery’s website that was first run in 2006 and later rebranded as Saatchi Online. This novel tool allows artists to upload up to twenty of their works to their own personal web page, which by 2010 boasted the work of some 100,000 artists. Taking a modest 30% commission for the artists work, the Saatchi Gallery again proves to be the platform to take the unknown artist to the big time.

 

 

Despite common appearances, Saatchi also appears to have a soft spot for hard hitting issues and ethical concerns. In 2008, inspired by the 2008 Beijing Olympics, Saatchi put on The Revolution Continues, showcasing Chinese art and focusing on the political issues and moral concerns of China’s Cultural Revolution. It was seen by many as one of the most connected and true showcase of contemporary modern art to be shown in the UK.

We’ll leave things on a good note, because despite its coloured past and its expected troubled future, The Saatchi Gallery has great intentions. It vows to make art something for the people, something that can be achieved by anyone, and for that to be their focal aim in a climate that is increasingly money and status driven deserves some recognition.