Category: Uncategorized

 

  

I know this will surprise you, but this was my first ever Museum visit. As someone who lived almost all of my life abroad, visiting museums was one thing that just was not part of my early experience; I never had the chance to see one, and in fact I did not know why they are important. Therefore, before visiting the MET, I did not know what to fully think, meaning I did not have a huge preexisting idea of art. Don’t get me wrong, I have read books about art, I have written papers about art base on that I had learned from reading art related materials. But to physically interact with it, I have always lacked such experience. My visit to the MET yesterday changed that.

I usually thought art was just something created primarily to be admired for its beauty, and with a meaning of course. So, I expected to see impressive paintings and sculptures. In short, all my anticipation was tied to beauty. I WANTED TO SEE BEAUTIFUL WORKS, that’s it!  I did not expect works to make me think about history, culture, and NYC’s role in preserving art from around the world. 

Diana by Augustus Saint-Gaudens and the Tabernacle of Cherves, two pieces that stood out to me. From their informational cards, they were created in different centuries and for very different purposes, but both challenged my understanding of what art can represent. They were not just solely for beauty. 

                       

Diana.  At first glance, I was already drawn to the sculpture because of its graceful pose and the incredible sense of movement. It appears balanced on one foot while drawing her bow, making the sculpture seem almost alive. I immediately went reading the information card and learned that this sculpture originally served as a weathervane on the tower of Madison Square Garden before the building was demolished in 1925. That detail changed how I viewed the work. Thinking for a second that this piece was originally designed as part of New York City’s skyline, and that at one point New Yorkers could look up and see Diana watching over the city wowed me. 

                     

The Tabernacle of Cherves, a French religious object made around 1220-1230 also really captured my attention as I read the info card. I grew up being religious, therefore as I saw that these images were most appropriate for a cupboard intended for storing the bread consecrated as Christ’s body during the mass, I wanted to learn even more. I appreciated the amount of skill, symbolism, and storytelling packed into this small object. Every part of it seemed to communicate an important religious event. And I began to also see that art was also a way to educate, inspire, and express faith. 

At this point, after first museum visit, I think I am leaning a little more towards Marcel Duchamp’s idea of what art is. In my ENG 101 class, I wrote a whole project challenging Duchamp’s claim of art in his readymade, Fountain. I was more with Leo Tolstoy’s arguments that art must express sincere feelings that produce empathy and social cohesion, excluding utilitarian texts such as business documents and schoolbooks unless they can transmit authentic feeling. But my visit to the MET changed the way I think about art. I no longer see museums simply as places that store beautiful objects. Instead, I see them as places where history, culture, religion, identity, and more come together through artistic expression.

For my visit to the Met I chose two pieces of artwork that spoke to me. First, an ornamental ceiling with no other title than “Ceiling” given on the placard. I recalled in our first class meeting, when discussing “The Creation of Adam” in the Sistine Chapel, that humans tend to have a feeling of awe when looking up. This fact was confirmed to me by the amount of time I spent observing the complexities and subtle details in this ceiling. After walking away and massaging my sore neck I considered one of the questions for the blog post: does this support my idea of art? For this piece my answer was an easy “yes, of course!” The level of human talent and creativity that goes into creating a piece like this, and the fact that it was designed to be viewed by many all contribute to my assessment that this is clearly a piece of art. When considering how this piece relates to the city I deferred to the placard for context. Apparently this piece is from a Christian church in Spain however the design is clearly Islamic. The story is that during Christian conquests against Muslim rule a new art style known as mudéjar was born, in which many christian churches blended their artistic styles with Islamic influences. This blending of cultures, although somewhat violent in this context, reminds me of how art and style in NYC has blended with many different cultures around the world.

For my next piece I chose a chess board that was on display in the new costume exhibit. This piece was meant to be an addition to a costume that displayed the word “untitled” written in braille; however, I found this chessboard more interesting. It featured raised squares and tactile playing pieces in order to facilitate the game of chess for blind and low vision players. When asking the question of whether or not this is art the answer becomes more difficult. This piece displays a nice craftsmanship and thoughtful design although it was likely mass produced for a utilitarian purpose. Does that objectively disqualify this as art? I’m honestly not sure, but I do find beauty in its purpose and design, so to me, I would consider it art. When relating this piece to NYC I think about the people playing chess in parks and how a board like this could increases the accessibility to many others. Its inclusion of disabled players reminds me of the ethos of acceptance shared by many New Yorkers.