I’ve been to Ermitage and seen El Greco, I’ve seen Raphael’s Madonna del Granduca in a Pushkin Museum, I’ve seen Mona Lisa in a Louvre, Munk’s The Scream in a Munk Museum, Rotko in the Museum of Art in DC, I am still wish to visit the Venece where the Tintoretto was working and Florence famous from being a lullaby of DaVinci and Buonarroti. But what might I get from the Metropolitan Museum of Art? Raphael again, why not?
But first it was a hall of butts, many-many ancient Greek and Roman butts (I wonder who decided to position them in such a manner) with the most powerful Hercules’s.
I am not a big fan of ancient sculpture, though, and moved directly to the painting area. There are, of course, more than enough significant paintings, but first I was admitted and first touched me was not even Virgil’s Tomb by Moonlight, with Silius Italicus Declaiming, 1779 by Joseph Wright, but the kid, about 10 years old, with utter devotion drawing this picture. It is the most amusing to watch how the art applies to people’s emotions, especially if it is a child’s mind. God knows why this little boy was so affected by this painting with an ancient poet’s tomb, and if he even knows who that guy is who accidentally got reincarnated in a Divided Comedy.
I am also aimed to the French art, Impressionism, though I like this sense of simplicity. Shoes by Vincent van Gogh was this type of art hiding some mystery beneath. They say, Van Gogh “painted several still lifes of shoes or boots during his Paris period” and this picture, “painted later, in Arles, evinces a unique return to the earlier motif” but mow being placed in within a specific spatial context: namely, the red-tile floor of the Yellow House”. Shoes “may have been those of Patience Escalier, whose portrait Van Gogh executed around the same time, late summer 1888”. I like such types of stories beyond the picture itself, and its simple big sense makes me remember it.
And the third, and actually the main pleasure, was again Raphael with exclusive exhibition-tour Sublime Poetry as a view on his career, with unique “drawings, paintings, prints, and tapestries on view present a portrait of his dashing artistic personality and astonishingly creative mind”. It is significantly attributed to how future masterpieces are basically developing through the sketches as a film photo, as you can easily recognise these future well-known canvases. It is nonetheless intriguing to observe how this, basically one of the Renaissance establishment’s paintings, had been developing from his contemporaries like Perugino, who were applying the same motives you can find in the exhibition as well, or how his own painting developed to become more dramatic and reach beyond earlier portraits.
With this actual point when I face Raphael’s paintings 10 years after our first meeting, I realized that art is stretched out over time experience which developing simultaneously with you. Same as aiming the simplicity of the complication of Raphael’s works, aiming to the point upfront. My first experience of that was in Moscow, and now it is in New York, which is kind of symbolic though I haven’t decided why yet.
test
