Everyone flocked to the 4th floor to get a glimpse of the “Starry Night” or any of Pablo Picasso’s masterpieces on display. I went with a friend and we were discussing the insurmountable amount of hours he would have to work retail to be able to even come close to buying any of the famous pieces. We then ruminated as to what art actually was. What makes something art? A piece that evokes an emotion can be classified as art. One that makes a political statement or one that makes a statement satirizing social norms or status quos can be art. But what about just creative expression? Jackson Pollock’s “One: Number 31, 1950” hangs on the 4th floor. It can often be confused with my 3 year old nieces drawings as it resembles a convoluted mess. However, why does it hang there with many art savants hovering around it, constantly trying to justify its existence in the MOMA? Name, recognition, prestige, all those extrinsic qualities factor into deciding who is “in” and who isn’t. For now, Pollock is in, but will he always be? We don’t know.
In the 1960s section, a bevy of art was clearly influenced by external sources, such as the Civil Rights Movement, the Women’s Movement, the Gay Rights Movement, and even the artist movement established in New York City. I think the exhibition was done well and spread the whole decade out in a manner that attempted to correctly portray important elements from each year in a creative and eye-grabbing fashion. The really “60s style” art was more seen in the tail-end of the decade sections, roughly from 1967 and on with art deco styles and visions of what the future would look like in terms of fashion, lifestyle, and especially architecture.
The wall of albums caught my attention, especially the “Roundhouse UFO” made by Martin Sharp. I also really liked Jason Crum’s 2 NYC art pieces, both titled, “Project for a Painted Wall, New York City, New York”. I thought the blending of this really obvious “art” placed within a regular street in NYC offered a cool distinction between museum art and art that utilizes urban photographs being displaced inside a museum.
Jerome Krase
March 18, 2017 — 12:41 pm
I also prefer to think of the judgment that something is “art” as a matter of taste; for example, on the part of the viewer in the case of visual art. Assigning a commodity value to it relates to a different aspect of society. I value my children and grandchildren’s “creations” more than, let us say Van Gogh’s, but I would happy give them in exchange for his. I then would sell them and give the money (perhaps) to them and am pretty sure they would appreciate that more than finding their artwork in our memory box when my wife and I fade away.