tell us about yourself
Reviews
Diego Rivera: Guilty!
012 years
Was Diego Rivera wrong for what he painted in his mural, Man at the Crossroads? In my opinion, yes, he definitely was at fault in the situation.
Nelson Rockefeller first asked Picasso and Matisse to paint the mural in Rockefeller Center, but Matisse refused and Picasso never replied to the request. Diego Rivera was then asked, and given the honor to paint the mural at one of the biggest tourist areas in New York City. According to the audio at the MoMA, the mural was “intended to be the greatest and most monumental of all civic construction projects.” Diego Rivera was given this great opportunity to showcase his work. The theme: Man at the Crossroads Looking with Hope and High Vision to the Choosing of a New and Better Future. Instead of Rivera respecting the Rockefeller’s and appreciating the opportunity he was given, he did something that I believe was very wrong. The Rockefeller’s were Baptists, who at that time were part of the Prohibition movement. Diego Rivera included in the mural a painting of David Rockefeller’s father drinking gin surround by women in low cut gowns. This portrayed the Rockefeller’s as hypocrites. The mural also featured a painting of Lenin, a famous communist. In the early sketches of the mural, Rivera showed the competition between communism and capitalism, and later on sketched Lenin in the mural. Nelson Rockefeller asked Rivera to remove that portion of the mural, but he refused. The mural was supposed to show the great future that America and New York had in store in the 20th century, but Rivera showed an intoxicated Rockefeller and a communist instead. Before the painting was even completed, Rivera was let go from the job. The mural was covered and eventually removed. I strongly agree with the decision made because Rivera took advantage and didn’t seem to me like he wanted to portray a positive depiction of New York, but instead show his own views. I believe that Abby Rockefeller is partially at fault too because she greatly admired Diego Rivera and his work and wanted Nelson Rockefeller to call upon him to do the work. She should have known that he was a communist and may have depicted his own views in his work. I agree with Abby Rockefeller and do believe that Diego Rivera is a very talented artist after seeing all of his paintings. They evoke emotions in the viewers. However, I think what he did with the Rockefeller mural was very wrong and the removal and destruction of the mural was the right result.
Don Giovanni at the Met
012 years
Don Giovanni was my first opera and it was very different than I expected it to be. First of all, the Metropolitan Opera House was absolutely beautiful. From the moment I saw it, I was astounded. The glowing stairs and the brightly lit glass windows really captured my attention. Elegantly dressed individuals surrounded the fountain. As I walked into the Opera House, I loved looking at the formal attire of everyone attending. Women dressed in stunning dresses and gowns accompanied by men in suits and tuxedos. When we walked inside, the first thing that caught my eye was the chandelier. To me, it looked like a huge snowflake. It was so glamorous with its sparkling crystals. The red carpet made me feel like I was some kind of superstar at an awards show. While finding our seats, I felt nauseous looking down because of how high up we were, but it was amazing to me how well we could see the stage from so far away. To my surprise, I was completely captivated from the moment the opera began. I thought the singing would be loud and uncomfortable to hear, but it was actually very enjoyable. I thought it was great that we were able to have the subtitles throughout the performance. Although I read the libretto beforehand, I wanted to know which parts we were up to. Every so often I would glance at the subtitles and immediately know what was happening. I didn’t think they were distracting, but instead helpful. I think I would have become uninterested after a while without the subtitles because I wouldn’t have known what was going on. I also think that the humor of the opera would be lost without the subtitles. If I hadn’t read in English what was said, I would just hear the crowd laughing and not know what the joke was about. The fact that I can understand some Italian made me enjoy the opera even more because I was attending an event that my grandparents did, and I could understand some of what was being said. I loved the scene where Leporello tells Donna Elvira all about Don Giovanni’s list of women. It was humorous and we really got to see Leporello’s character. My favorite part of the opera was when Don Giovanni was dragged to hell. It was so unexpected for me. I thought the set of the whole performance was pretty simple and the moment the stage opened and the fire came shooting up, I was speechless. I felt the heat from the stage and it was amazing to me how real it looked. I really enjoyed the opera and am glad that I was able to experience such a classy event.
And so you’re back, from outer space…
012 years
I thoroughly enjoyed the performance of “I Don’t Believe in Outer Space.” I thought it was very Fluxus, considering it didn’t have a storyline or plot and there were many random things happening at once. I like how they carried the same song throughout each part of the performance and used it in different ways. As we were saying in class, music can affect everyone differently and the lyrics of the song were portrayed differently in each scene. In the original song, you can really hear Gloria’s feelings with the musical sounds behind the lyrics she sings. With the dancers speaking the lyrics of the song without music, they were able to change the feeling and meaning of the original song. For example, when the creepy neighbor visits the woman and is told “no” after asking for a drink from the whisky cabinet and hoping to “get down,” he speaks the lyrics sarcastically, making the scene humorous. Other scenes of the performance were also funny, including the one in which the “politician” uses sexual innuendos to try and get elected. He wanted to “undress and world and share his cocktail with everyone.” His remarks kept the audience laughing and awake. For me, certain parts of the performance became boring, when the music and dancing became very slow. I enjoyed watching all the chaos onstage and trying to figure out what was going on. One of the most chaotic scenes was when the narrator kept repeating, “As if by any chance.” My favorite parts were when the individual woman spoke the dialogue of the creepy neighbor and the woman. I found it very entertaining the way she moved her body and changed her voice. The ping pong scene was also very enjoyable, because although there actually was no ping pong ball, the way the dancers moved to the sounds made you believe there was. I think the performance displays a very Dionysiac art, with randomness, chaos, and a few sexual references. I think when Nietzsche says we need more Dionysiac art, he means art like “I Don’t Believe in Outer Space.” To me, many ballet performances are boring and lack excitement, but I think “I Don’t Believe in Outer Space” breaks the boundaries of the usual ballets and gives the audience a new experience. If this is what Nietzsche meant, then I would agree that we need more art that isn’t so Apollonian, or confined, to show the real world.
Fluxus…Art?
013 years
by Teressa Cali
in Reviews
Visiting the Fluxus exhibit today was a new experience for me. I thought it was very enjoyable and unique, and I’ve never actually seen any art like it before. The tour made me question what art really is. In my own opinion, I don’t think many of the displays are actually “art,” or at least the type of art that normally comes to mind. For example, the “10-Hour Flux Clock,” with 10 hours instead of 12, is just a clock that someone reinvented. Anyone could have done that, but Robert Watts took action and did. He went against conventional art and, like all the Fluxus artists, did something new. Most of the art found in the exhibit was odd to me and made me question what the artists were trying to convey. It also made me realize that ANYTHING can be art. My favorite part of the whole exhibit was the event scores because viewers can interpret them however they choose and allow their imaginations to run wild without anyone telling them they are wrong. I also thought the “Fluxbox Containing God” was a very thought-provoking piece. We look at God as beyond our reach and I think Ben Vautier exposed that well. Our tour guide said, when a person is given the box, they tend to examine and then try to open it, but are unable to because it is glued shut. I think it relates to our relationship with God, because although we do have a connection to him, we can never fully understand, or see him. I also thought the “Revealing Fact” was interesting. It had a thermometer in the middle of a box and the words “good person” and “bad person” on opposite sides. I’m not sure what Jock Reynolds was trying to express, but I believe that the temperature on the thermometer would determine whether or not you were a good or bad person. All of the artwork I looked at, I interpreted in my own way, which I thought made the experience more fun. Instead of just looking at the artwork, the viewer is able to become a part of its meaning. I think art can often be boring, but Fluxus brought on a new set of emotions. Although it is different and unconventional, and some of it doesn’t look like art at all, it makes you think and question many things. I like the fact that the Fluxus artists did something new and didn’t follow the same, mundane rules of typical art.
