soak in the art and some Blue Bottle on the new SFMOMA rooftop (SoMa)
DISCLAIMER: this turned out to be a ridiculously long post. Fair warning. No offense taken if no one reads the entirety of this one.
When people walk into a museum and start snapping pictures of the art, I always wonder what the future holds for those pictures. For example, will that picture of Painting X be shown to mildly interested family members in a “San Francisco Vacation” slideshow? (Note to self 1* develop actual slides of a trip at some point to show to whoever will politely watch your slideshow. 2*get a slide projector. 3* plan a trip). Anyway, I digress. Will those photos be uploaded to a computer, never to be seen again? Or will that person go home and REALLY look through the pictures, evaluating the art? (My guess is “no” to the last option.)
I feel like most pictures such as the ones I am describing are taken because the viewer feels obligated to do so based on some (possibly false) sense of artistic and intellectual intimidation. Even if the viewer revisited those pictures, I believe it would be in vain- especially when dealing with Modern Art where so much of the interpretation deals with spatial interaction.
A very small (but noteworthy) part of my hostility on the subject stems from the inordinate amount of time I spend trying to “understand” modern art… to no avail. (If you have some urge to respond here that “it is not meant to be understood in full,” please hold off on your vague, esoteric argument as I have considered that).
I have never gotten a great deal of pleasure in studying or viewing modern art and as an Art History major, this always seems like a shame… so I keep revisiting the genre, trying to find some solace in it.
Sitting on the rooftop of SF Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA), I tried to think it through. My disinterest begs the question, “Why do I enjoy art before 1900 SO much more?”
It hits me.
Before 1900, art was used as a form of media- shaping the culture and giving the society an outlet and a visual voice. To understand art in the past, it takes a great deal of cultural understanding and (metaphorical) presence in history.
This understanding is not only attainable but also very relavent to many other aspects of our lives. Most importantly, it often acts as a key to reading artwork of the time.
Modern art, therefore, should be EVEN more enjoyable to me. I am innately in tune with our culture (because I am living during the time), therefore it takes no research; I also have a pretty solid grasp of current events…
Bewildered by my frustration, Cloud Cult and M. Ward offer lyrical reassurance as I listen to my iPod in the museum garden. I admire my cappuccino heart design that decorates the foam of my coffee. “Is THAT art too?” I wonder sarcastically. My mind wanders as I watch everyone around me, marveling at the fashion sense that is becoming so prevalent. I wonder if maybe it is more extreme because this is San Francisco…
A couple, adorned in neon accessories, cuddles nearby where I am sitting and I wonder about how they met, what their relationship is like, what their future will hold… This brings my rambling thoughts to my own personal life and I purposefully and abruptly focus back on the art debate- a comparably more enjoyable frustration for me.
…But modern art is not based on stories obvious to someone with cultural knowledge. I decide there are three sides to the genre:
- Based on the artist: This influence in modern art stems from the artists’ personal experiences, emotions, and viewpoint. This slams a door on the possibility that a viewer might understand the nature or truth of a piece. In short, to understand the depth of a piece, you must understand the artist on a level that is simply unattainable.
- Environmental interaction: How the piece of art communicates with the physical space around it or explores and experiments with color and light. This is something that is heavily stressed in modern art and depends on a very basic level of human competence. A simple evaluation of what is physically in front of the audience…
- Audience interaction: Requires no understanding of the art or subject. This is unavoidable and an interaction that is constantly occurring. We participate in every single piece of art we view, whether or not we want to. Each piece provides a different experience with each new viewer. The audience/art conversation is redefined with a new individual and renders all art “timeless” based on the fact that it is forever “unfinished” (pardon the use of rather cliche terms here). I mean to say that the art is never fully complete as it is constantly changing based on who is viewing it and how they enter, interact with, and exit the space of the art… Essentially, the ever-changing/unfinished component is “you”.
So why such a hard time with modern art? I feel a constant disconnect that might always be unfulfilled because I will never fully understand it. When dealing with spatial reasoning and color contrast, I always feel like I am offensively oversimplifying the art. Which usually makes me think about the artist’s intention, leaving me frustrated and disgruntled.
(Note: If someone has a different view on modern art, I absolutely want to hear it. Let me know… we can grab coffee… maybe on the roof of a museum in the city or something…)
…The coffee was good too.