Tuesday, August 18, 2009

MET, MOMA; at the Guggenheim

My Ode to Norman Rockwell's piece, "Abstract and Concrete"

Hey, almost forgot the great time I had with my wife a couple of weeks ago, right when I got back from Afghanistan, when we went to NYC.

As an artist, this was almost a religious obligation-- New York has been Art Mecca since WWII.

We visited the MOMA, the Met, and the Guggenheim. I saw so much art-- and I mean good, "hey I've seen that a thousand times in text books" art.

The only negatives of the whole experience were 1) the cost of admission. Each was $18 to $20 per person...! and 2) the MOMA was at first a total diappointment when I toured the first few floors, which showcased all of the contemporary, "hey, I got a piece my art in the MOMA and all that I did was scratch color on a piece of copy paper" type of modern art. Pointless, useless --except as a nice joke in a lower-level art or design class.

The upper two floors more than made up for it though, as I saw Picasso, Dali, Wyeth, Van Gogh, and other really excellent true Modernists that I'd only seen in books up to that time.


Ammon said...

While I really, really love what is in the MET, I find it all very overwhelming. I think that it is the size and massive amount of work that makes it difficult to see it all.

Just so you know, the MET's admission price is their suggestion. There is no official fee to enter. If I go and don't plan to spend too long there, I always give less.

It is hard to beat NY and its art culture. At least in my very limited experience.

Jo Castillo said...

It is great to see the masters works in person. Very impressive and much more so than in books. I didn't get to visit a real art museum until I was an adult. What an experience. I'm glad you enjoyed it. My best experiences are the museums in Washington, D. C. My first was the Kimball Art Museum in Ft. Worth.