Skarmory!!!

When the Armory Show first premiered in 1913, it was the grandest art show of its time, containing 1,400 works of art. Many of the artists exhibited at the show were obscure and relatively unknown; however, this did not stop them from challenging the norm of the art of the time.

One piece I took an interest in – well, actually, Lawrenzo pointed it out and said there was a flamingo – was “Dances at the Spring” by Frances Picabia. Now, I wouldn’t have really taken such a look at this work if I wasn’t on a hunt for this “flamingo”. This art exemplifies cubism, and, if I would take it a step further, analytical cubism. I can make out a horse or pony, along with two people possibly kissing [the male(?) appears to have his tongue out]. Perhaps these figures are the rich, as they are literally riding on their high horse.

During the years preceding 1913, there was a lash out against corruption and unhealthy work practices, such as those Upton Sinclair and other muckrakers brought to light. It’s possible this painting is pointing out how the wealthy people of the time profited by metaphorically riding on the backs of the laborers. The reason this concept works so well with cubism is because of the idea of viewing the subject in a three-dimensional way. Picabia is looking at the rich from another perspective to analyze why they’ve become so wealthy. The painting is also done in all red; many dada artists ended up becoming communists around the time of the Russian Revolution.

The sculpture “Woman’s Head” by Pablo Picasso was another that caught my eye. It’s a clay sculpture that is solely the head and neck of a woman with her hair up. However, the sculpture isn’t rounded or smooth; that is, it looks rugged, maybe even rocky, in appearance, as if Picasso intended for it to look less human. The neck looks relatively muscular; it reminds me of a character out of Dragonball Z. In fact, aside from the name, this sculpture looks masculine to me.

Around the time Picasso would have made this, suffrage and Prohibition were gaining traction in the United States. For it to appear at the Armory Show under such a name, perhaps Picasso meant for it to express approval of the women’s rights movement. In a cubist sense, Picasso was looking at the different aspects of women but may have seen that the difference between men and women was minute, if he found a difference at all.

All-in-all, there’s a lot to interpret from the works we saw at the Armory Show. I found it very hard to actually think about the art’s meaning or historical context while we were there though, maybe because of the crowd of people surrounding me or maybe I was too distracted by Nude Descending a Staircase. In any case, I liked the show.

In the Martin Honert exhibit, we saw several mind-boggling sculptures, created from negatives from pictures of Honert’s teachers. This exhibit was very interesting and somewhat cryptic, and also felt like it could be a great setting for a horror film (Night at the Museum 3: House of Wax?). The way the eyes are positioned for each sculpture, it seems as though they’re all taking turns glaring at you, no matter what point of view you look at them from. This made the piece feel vivid and life-like, as if one of the sculptures was going to reach out and grab me. Once we all got into it though, it was fun to fool around with the exhibit a little bit.

Afterwards, at the Pieter Hugo exhibit, the art was more realistic, like everyday life, and had photos of people in interesting poses or intriguing situations. There were several depicting naked people in intricate positions but we’re all children, so I’m not posting those. Some of the exhibit also featured many African American subjects with a sort of hopeless demeanor, so they may have been influenced by Apartheid or civil rights or perhaps discrimination/racism in general. This picture reminded me of the lady from Insidious though…

(Totally didn’t steal Lawrenzo’s idea)

The third exhibit was almost exclusively dedicated to Vladimir Lenin, which was exciting for me since Lenin is one of my favorite historical figures and second-most favorite Russian leader (first is Stalin). There were pictures of idols made in his image, as well as a statue of him wearing a golden chain of his own head, alongside a similar sculpture that lacked a head. I think this was very interesting symbolism on the part of the artists. There were also portraits of Lenin, looking very Leo DiCaprio-esque, adorning the walls of the exhibit.