Sunday, February 27, 2011

Modern Art Museum


On Friday, February 25, I went to the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth. At first, I couldn’t find the building, driving aimlessly between a few museums. Suddenly, I noticed a modern looking building in the distance and knew right away that was what I was looking for because of the architecture. For me, the architecture was my favorite part of the museum. The building itself, with big glass walls and water flowing closely to the glass, was spectacular. Before I even went to the museum, I read on the museums website that it felt as though one was walking on water. That statement was spot on. The combination of glass walls and water made it feel as though I was standing in a building that was on an island, floating in the middle of the pond.  I especially liked how a few pieces were placed in areas where the building stretched into the water. It added a new dimension to the art. In most museums I have been to, the museum seemed stuffy and compact. The Modern Art Museum, though, was much different, having wide-open spaces and large rooms. The architecture of the museum helped me understand the modernist movement and ideas.
            At times, this semester, I have struggled seeing and understanding modern ideas in the stories we have read. After attending the museum, though, the movement made much more sense to me. Seeing modern works visually, not just in readings, helped tremendously in comprehending the movement.  In almost all of the works, there was a sense of traditions being thrown aside in a spirit of experimentation. Some works were so different that it looked as if the painter just threw paint on a piece of canvas. There was no structure or sense of organization. In some pieces, I could feel a sense of rebellion and revolt against social norms.
            One piece in particular that stood out was Andy Warhol’s “Self-Portrait”.  In almost all portraits I have seen, the portrait displays a person of perfection or a person of nobility or importance. They are done with soft colors and vivid detail.  Warhol’s piece, though, was far different. His face was green, his hair disheveled, and his expression angry and intense.  There were also random splotches of green coming off his hair.  This was all done on a black background, which made the portrait jump off the wall.  The portrait seemed to go against every ideal that is usually seen in portraits.  It made me feel a sense of rebellion, a sense of danger that was about to happen. It also reminded me of the Big Brother in the novel “1984”. I imagined that Big Brother, who controlled the people and inspired passion and dangerous emotions, looked similar to this when he was projected.  The tone of the novel was dark, frustrated with authority, and pessimistic about the control over people. I felt Warhol’s piece had a similar tone and affect on its viewers.  I thought the piece, like the rest of the museum, captured the modernist movement effectively and evoked powerful emotions. 

1 comment:

  1. Hi Evan, Thanks for the good posts, all three of them. I am glad that you had a chance to finally meet with your conversation partner, and I know that these first meetings are not always easy, But it sounds as thought you managed well. I am also pleased that you went back to reread the Wright story. It does have some interesting issues to consider. And finally, I truly enjoyed your museum response. I think you are perfectly correct in stating that the modernist art movement intentionally defies our conceptions and expectations of what is art. Good posts. dw

    ReplyDelete