The exhibit “Hélio Oiticica: To Organize Delirium,” at the Whitney Museum of American Art, is something different from all other exhibits. The artist, Hélio Oiticica, is known for his art style that is anything but classical. He does not draw paintings or take pictures. He wants the viewer to experience his message, not just see it or understand it. The curators have made a very strong statement about Hélio Oiticica’s work. In the title of the exhibit, they claim a need to “organize” his art. It is easy to feel confused by cubes and square structures hanging from the ceiling, but who decided it wasn’t organized? The idea of organizing someone’s thoughts and especially their work, sounds invading. It is better to look at it as the museum organized all his pieces to be in one place. They clearly wanted to provide a setting that Oiticica would enjoy viewers to see. Maybe, the curators thought there must be some organization in order to understand where Oiticica’s ideas come from. Regarding his intentions as an artist, the Whitney Museum created the perfect setting. Hélio Oiticica’s intentions were clearly connected to a certain experience, and the curators made that possible. They even brought two parrots over from New Jersey, to make the feeling entire. They completely agreed with his intention as an artist.
Hélio Oiticica’s evolution as an artist was not very prominent by any set up in the museum. There wasn’t some kind of order by which to observe the exhibit. Maybe the curators saw it was enough to organize his work in sections. There was a section with some of his writings in these glass tables. Viewers could sit and read them comfortably. There were rooms with beds and hammocks to relax on. The interactive parts in the dessert area were together. I did not observe a process of evolution in the artist’s work based on the set up of the museum.
The narrative of the exhibit is incredibly engaging. The picture below shows part of Eden, where crates of books and foam pieces where surrounded by a curtain. Just the decision to place the books there and cover them with a curtain that you could pull to the side and discover something, shows his interactive mindset. This piece really intrigued me because I couldn’t really understand the purpose. His interactive pieces were all connected to the five senses so I thought about how the senses could help develop different ideas through art.
There are positive and negative aspects of the narrative’s set up. Having an engaging and interactive exhibit, allows people to really experience what the artist is feeling or sending as a message. It was incredible to take your shows off and literally walk through the art installations, which goes hand in hand with “walking in someone’s shows.” The exhibit set up allowed us to feel exactly what Hélio Oiticica wanted us to feel. On the other hand, it could be kind of difficult to focus on the art or the artist as you’re doing something physical and interesting, that takes over all of your attention.
I certainly believe that this way to explore art makes it easier for the observer to understand the idea of the artist. Engaging all senses and creating a whole collection of someone’s ideas is captivating and impressive. The most compelling piece was Tropicalia, where you could take off your shoes and feel the exact things Hélio Oiticica wanted us to feel. It would be a waste explaining the experience because Oiticica choose to make us experience it, not describe it with pictures or words.
Hélio Oiticica has created art that seems alive. Visiting the exhibit is an experience, not just something you go to observe. Looking back at the time I spent at the museum, I realized my idea about my own museum in Blog #2 is very similar to what Oiticica has created. His art work is strongly connected to nature and to incorporating the five senses. The whole exhibit was mesmerizing and I plan on going again before it travels off.
Ellen Stoyanov
Your view that Helio wants the visitors to experience not just see his art is one that I really do agree with. Every other museum that you can go to, you have to keep your distance from the art much less be allowed to touch it. He wants the spectators to understand the art by being a part of it which gave a very cool feeling to me.
I really like how you distinguished between understand something and truly experiencing it. I think you did a great job of participating in the exhibit and finding an interpretation that was your own. I also like how you spoke of how his art came alive, it is something beyond just seeing, it is something that can be experienced through multiple senses to truly get a feel of what Oiticica was trying to illustrate (beyond the literal sense). Experiencing, rather than just walking through, has allowed me to truly see a little bit of the artist and the way he thought.
I tis really true that you had to you all five senses to fully capture the exhibit. Also, I like your honesty that you didn’t understand exactly what the books meant but at the same time, I think you got the ultimate goal of the books which was to create an interactive environment. In order to analyze art, you have to give it all your senses and I think the artists helped us out with that job in this exhibit.
After reading “Cool Heat: An Art Outlaw Who Still Simmers” and “How to Understand Hélio Oiticica’s Journey From Art Visionary to Coke Dealer and Back Again,” I understood some aspects of Hélio Oiticica’s life that influenced his art. Being homosexual and addicted to cocaine created both hardship and inspiration in the artist’s life. The political situation in Brazil at the time have also been factors in his art. Reading Ben Davis’ article, it is interesting to think about his installations as nothing “that far outside of the ordinary experience of, say, a day at the beach,” but interesting because they aren’t expected in a museum. Through Holland Cotter’s article, I understood what “story” the curators are trying to tell. Overall, knowing Hélio Oiticica’s life story in depth changes the way you view his art. I wasn’t that informed about his life and I think that helped me appreciate his art more, in this case specifically. The two authors that have studied his life rather judge his art based on events or actions he’s made.