Week 5: THE NATIONAL GALLERY

1. Logo: Unfortunately, I do think this "logo" is merely a typeface. There is very little personality to the logo, and I don't think it does justice to the collection in the museum. I also don't understand the emphasis of "Gallery" as the focal point of the logo, because I think that "National" would be a more appropriate point of emphasis. The Museum is located in a grand building with a roman column facade, and it is a central landmark on Trafalgar Square. This design and location warrants a better logo. Further, because of the classical, famous paintings in the collection, I would propose a new logo that would either be a classic typeface that is at least more exciting than the current one, or a simple and comprehensive symbol to put on merchandise, banners, etc.

2. van Gogh: I'm conflicted about my opinion of the van Gogh paintings. I have heard about Vincent van Gogh since I was a child, and seen his works manipulated in prints and on merchandise, so it was a strange experience to observe the actual pieces in person. Ultimately, I think the paintings did live up to the hype. However, I didn't have a particularly high opinion of his artwork to begin with. As a result, I was impressed with the texture and brushstrokes of the oil paints that I was able to see close-up, and which aren't really reflected in the myriad prints of his work that I've seen. But in terms of the paintings being visually pleasing to me personally, I was underwhelmed. I should qualify that this is largely in reference to the particular sunflower painting in the collection, which was my least favorite van Gogh in the gallery. It just doesn't stand out to me as beautiful, harmonious, or cheerful, which I think is what he was going for. I love sunflowers and the color yellow, but I do not particularly enjoy this painting. Perhaps I was put off by the lack of contrast, which usually characterizes impressionist paintings. My favorite van Gogh was the Wheatfields, which conversely I did think was quite beautiful. This painting definitely employs the contrast of colors typical of impressionism. The swirling paint strokes were reminiscent of his signature style in Starry Night, and I love the dramatic differences between the colors in the landscape. Perhaps if there was a broader collection of van Gogh's work in the National Gallery, I could have appreciated his body of work more comprehensively.

3. Object of Desire: I have two objects of desire. The first would be suitable for my mansion/palace/villa, while the later would be suitable for my (realistic) future home. Pierre Mignard's "Marquise de Seignelay and Two of her Sons" is one of my favorites from the collection. It is French, bright, bold, dramatic, and regal. This is exactly the kind of artwork I would hope to have in my future palace. Ordinarily, I wouldn't like to have a painting of actual people on my walls, but I could make an exception for this one. Also, it would have to be in a grand, intricate golden frame, of course. The second object of desire that I could realistically put in my future home is "The Western Railway and its Exit from Paris" by Charles Angrand. The subject matter of this painting isn't of much interest to me, but the colors of the oil paint and the brushstrokes stood out to me immediately. I specifically am drawn to the yellow-hued field in which an onlooker sits. I think the colors in this field are beautiful, especially in combination with one another. I would put this painting up on my wall during the springtime, or possibly late summer, but I wouldn't keep it up year-round.

4. Gallery/Display: I loved the display style of the National Gallery, especially in comparison to the Tate Modern last week. The dark, richly colored walls in shades of plum and turquoise and occasionally with patterned wallpaper, combined with dramatic, ornate golden frames was much more appealing to me than the blank, utterly white walls in the modern style. This really intensified the drama of the galleries, but I liked it. I think that giving these paintings a sort of regal surrounding does them greater justice. I also preferred the salon style because, as I discussed last week, there is less pressure to focus on one piece. This seems counterintuitive to be pressured by a blank white background, and feel at ease with a dark, dramatic background, but for some reason that's how I responded to the two different gallery styles. Also, I think I like the rich colored walls and ornate frames because that's how I want to decorate my house as an adult--the more gold, the better.

5. Exploitation/Merchandising: I don't think all the merchandising in museum gift shops diminishes the artwork, but some of it certainly does. I think producing postcards, poster prints, and books of the artwork is acceptable because it's not really manipulation of the image, but rather reproduced and appreciated for the piece itself. The National Gallery gift shop included all of these forms of reproduction, but they also stocked some rather demeaning products as well. In my opinion, selling umbrellas, neckties, refrigerator magnets, jewelry, and DVDs with images of famous paintings on them is unfortunate. I think the people who purchase said items probably don't appreciate the actual piece of art as much as they should. I also think that when an image of a famous work become so ubiquitous, people on the street would start to take a masterpiece for granted. Their images are on everyday, forgotten objects that don't do justice to the pieces of art. Rather, they are mass produced, and in my opinion, belittle the classic paintings they depict. That being said, I'm guilty of owning a few of these objects myself.

6. Object of Appreciation: The painting that caught my attention more than any other in the collection at the National Gallery was "The Execution of Lady Jane Grey" by Paul Delaroche. Once again, my reason for appreciation is the subject matter of the painting, which again reflects my interest in history, specifically British history. Jane Gray is particularly interesting to me because it was her rival, Mary Queen of Scots, who was responsible for her beheading after only nine days on the throne. She was only sixteen when she was executed, and her youth is clearly visible in this painting by Delaroche. The painting is incredibly dramatic, with dark shadows surrounding the central, bright angelic figure of Jane Gray, on her way to the chopping block. Her figure is clearly distraught, young, and scared, and the executioner dawned in red clothing waits exasperatedly to finish his duty. The painting is very striking (no pun intended), and I'd love to revisit it again.

Week 4: TATE MODERN

1. Logo: The variations within the Tate Modern logo are beneficial to the brand, in my opinion. Around the museum, in the shop, cafe, and on brochures, the Tate logo morphs from crisp and clear to blended and blurred. Most importantly, the logo is still always legible and recognizable. I think this variation significantly relates to the Tate Modern collection, which itself varies greatly in the period and origin of the pieces. The varied logo encompasses the broad range of contemporary art in Tate Modern, but also represents a consistent identity with the foundational base of "TATE". I think the blended Tate logo is much more appropriate for the Tate Modern museum than for the Tate Britain museum that we visited last week because the logo itself is modern and relates to the art collection much more so than the more traditional art in Tate Britain.

2. Free Admission: I have to constantly remind myself how lucky we are to visit these London museums for free. I can't imagine visiting art museums that house famous works of art for free in the United States. I do think that museum culture in the United States has a reputation as being only for the affluent. Going to a museum seems to be a high-brow form of entertainment, simply because the cost of admission to many museums, especially in big U.S. cities, is so high. This is certainly a deterrent for students, who usually have limited funds. Even though they may have an interest in art, the cost can be a major turn off, which is unfortunate for those individuals and also for the American museum culture more generally. In the four museums we have visited thus far in London, I don't see the museums populated exclusively by upper class visitors. Instead, I've seen families, students, young professions, etc.--people all across the spectrum. In a city as vibrant as London, I think museums add a significant amount to the cultural opportunities available to Londoners and visitors alike, and I think the U.S. should consider a museum model more akin to that of London.

3. The Unilever Series: Al Weiwei: I appreciate that the sunflower piece is a commentary on the relationship of the individual to the masses; however, I am uncertain if the display answers such philosophical life questions such as "what does it mean to be an individual in today's society." If a visitor to the museum wanted to, I'm sure he or she could contemplate on the exhibit and extract answers to such poignant questions. In my opinion, however, I think the exhibit is intriguing and impressive without delving too far into its intention. When I first saw the sea of porcelain sunflower seeds from above, I honestly thought I was looking at gray textured carpet. Once I actually went down to the ground level, I was really taken aback. I could focus on one individual seed spilling toward the edge of the concrete plane they rested on, and then look up to see literally millions of these same seeds stretching to the exterior wall of the museum. I watched the short film on the artist's process, and I was struck by the scenes in which elderly Chinese women sat and hand-painted every single seed. For these women, I think it would be easier to distinguish and appreciate the value of individuality in the seeds, as they were the ones physically creating them. As a visitor to the museum, it is hard to fathom the work that went into each seed, yet I appreciated the magnitude of the project. In relation to the other installation art we have seen this semester, I like this exhibit the most. While it attempts to evoke reaction and contemplation in the philosophical realm, I am able to appreciate the beauty and simplicity of the work alone, which cannot be said for other exhibits (mainly the Coral Reef).

4. Display: I have noticed more and more with each museum we visit that the wall color, frame, and gallery arrangement have much more of an impact on how I perceive a piece of art than I originally thought. The striking white walls in modern art museums like the Tate usually make me feel uncomfortable. In galleries with sparsely hung, large pieces on utterly white walls, I feel pressured to be overwhelmed by a piece. There is so much attention and focus on one single piece because of the empty white walls surrounding it, and for some reason this is unsettling to me. Even if I genuinely like the piece, I still feel pressured to stare at it in awe for a long period of time. In contrast to this experience in modern art galleries, I have appreciated the variation in wall color, frame, etc. in the other museums we have visited, mainly the V&A and Tate Britain. Especially in the romantics gallery last week, I felt as ease with turquoise walls, gold frames, and salon style hanging, and I definitely prefer this arrangement to that in modern galleries.

5. Power Station to Museum: Tate Modern is architecturally the most unusual museum I've ever visited, both inside and out. When I first came to the Tate a few years ago, I was sure that my brother was wrong when he pointed from the Millennium Bridge and said "that's the Tate Modern museum." It does not look like an art museum, and in fact I initially thought it was a terrible eyesore on the Thames riverbank. Now that I've visited it a few times, I appreciate it more. The outside is striking and provoking, which is exactly what its subject matter aims to be. Inside, the amount of open space is overwhelming. It truly feels like a gutted power station, yet there are swarms of people clambering about. I also think the interior layers of the museum are interesting. The ground and first floors are bare, with the exception of a small cafe, gift shop, and the featured exhibit (in this case the sunflower seeds). The main exhibits are spread out on two floors, with a floor for special exhibits sandwiched in-between. The top floor is my favorite, because the view of the city is stunning, and you can mingle in a comfortable atmosphere when you inevitably need a break from the artwork below. I suppose the concept for this museum is not one I would have chosen, which would have been almost a cliche futuristic, ultra-modernist glass building of some sort. In comparison, I think i quite like the power state Tate Modern better anyway.

6. Object of Appreciation: My favorite gallery in the museum was the Soviet street posters room. The prints in this room were initially produced by the Bolsheviks after the Revolution, and were continually produced under the reign of Stalin. The brightly colored propaganda posters were visible across the Soviet Union. I love this gallery because every space on the walls in filled, from the floor to the ceiling. The images are bright and animated, which reinforces Soviet patriotism and allows for hyperbolic representation of the political adversaries of the USSR. My favorite wall in the gallery was a collection of posters aimed at women in the Soviet Union. The messages ranged from telling women to keep quite and not spread political gossip, to appeals to the Red Army to protect the endangered women and children of the Soviet Union. I like the combination of women portrayed as figured who can actually contribute to the political culture (as seen in the top two posters of strong-looking women), to ones in need of protection (in the lower two posters). My favorite print in the room in called "The Mullah's Third Wife" by Josiv Gerasimovich in 1926. There's no description of who the woman really is (besides being the Mullah's third wife), but I love the color and shape of the painting. I think the red is very striking, a color which is ubiquitous in all of the posters as a symbol of Soviet power. This poster is simply beautiful, and I would love to return to it at the Tate or have a print of it myself.

Week 3: TATE BRITAIN

1. Logo: I have mixed feelings on the Tate logo, but overall I think the Tate Britain logo is inadequate given the subject matter of the museum. Especially in contrast to the Tate Modern museum, I think the Tate Britain museum is too traditional to employ such an unconventional logo. The misty, spray paint-like quality of the word "TATE" is attractive and unique, yet it does not mesh well with all of the exhibits in the museum. Whereas I think it fits exceedingly well with the Tate Modern museum, the logo here makes me think that the designers of the museum simply didn't want to put in the work to create a new identity for the companion museum to Tate Modern. Perhaps if I understood the relationship between the two museums better, I might approve of the Tate Britain logo more. I just don't think it is appropriate for a museum that is currently exhibiting the romantic paintings of JMW Turner. Another portion of the museum identity that I was unsatisfied with was the prominence of sponsorship. On almost every title wall, I saw the BP symbol with a caption that the exhibit was "Sponsored by BP". I saw this in every part of the museum, in multiple exhibits. For some reason, this really distracted me, and I think they could have simplified things by including a blurb about BP in the museum map.

2. Ophelia: The portrayal of Ophelia's death that we saw in the National Theater production of Hamlet contrasts greatly with the painting of Ophelia's death by Millais in the Tate Britain. Millais' depiction of Ophelia's death is traditional. Whenever I have read Hamlet or seen classic productions of Hamlet, the death of Ophelia is complete with drowning, a flowing gown, and lots of flowers and greenery around her. Indeed, in Millais' painting, Ophelia's death is portrayed with all these trimmings, including ornate blossoms on her dress, and she is surrounded by nature. In the modern interpretation of Hamlet that we saw at the National Theater, Ophelia's death was nothing like this at all. The greatest difference was that her death was not actually portrayed on the stage, the audience was instead told about her death, rather than actually seeing it, like in most other productions. Additionally, because this production of Hamlet was set in a modern police-state, Ophelia was the victim of a sort-of mob hit, rather than her usual route of suicide. Therefore, there was no ornate death scene for Ophelia in the production that we saw.

 

3. Display: I appreciated Tate Britain because their diverse collection of works allowed me to really distinguish display styles between exhibits. In one room there could be a modern sculpture gallery, and in another classic romantic paintings. In the modern style of gallery 11, the sparse white walls drew attention to the few pieces in the room. In addition to the relatively bare walls, the lines of the works were rigid, straight, and minimalistic. The result of this institutional setup was that the color and variation within the pieces really stood out. My attention was drawn to the pieces in these modern galleries immediately upon entry into the room, so the artwork was definitely the focal point. This contrasts with the display technique of the pre-Raphael style display in gallery 9, which had a much more ornate and almost cluttered feel to it. A major contrast was the pieces in the pre-Raphael display were arranged on the wall at varied heights, whereas the modern gallery had all of the artwork on the same geometric plane. Additionally, the paintings in the pre-Raphael style galleries  were mounted in ornate, gilded frames, which are very beautiful themselves, but can sometimes distract from the artwork itself. I think I prefer the minimalistic modern display style, but I also feel pressured to over-appreciate works in galleries like that because there is such a powerful focus on each piece.

4. Installation Art: The Coral Reef exhibit, more than anything else, scared me. I was uneasy the entire time I was in the exhibit, and my reaction, even upon further contemplation, is a negative one. When I first entered the exhibit, I thought I’d accidently walked into a storage closet or a part of the museum that guests are not supposed to visit. It smelled like a damp basement, which reemphasized the unpolished atmosphere, and there was absolutely no indication of how to navigate through the exhibit. There were several dead ends to doors that looked like they should be in a horror film. I also didn’t know if I should open any of the doors in the exhibit because I thought there might be monsters behind them. The creepiest room, in my opinion, was the darkened room with television screens playing white noise and models of plastic ears of corn sitting next to them. I was too scared to even attempt to interpret this. I only discovered that the exhibit was a representation of myriad modern religions until I read the description after exiting the exhibit. This makes more sense, as the Islamic recruitment posters nailed to the wall of what looked like a garden shed in the exhibit make slightly more sense now. I did not like this exhibit at all, and I will not be returning.

5. Tate Britain vs. V&A: I definitely prefer the Victoria & Albert Museum to the Tate Britain Museum. There was something about Tate Britain as a whole that was off-putting to me. Once again, I find it hard to reconcile such diverse collections within one museum. I also think the Coral Reef exhibit was emotionally scarring, so that could be another reason that I didn't enjoy Tate Britain. I appreciated the V&A because they had diverse collection (Imperial Chinese Robes to Isotypes to Underground designs), yet there was a consistency between all of the galleries. I think Tate Britain was really lacking this. I felt that the two museums were comparable is their accessibility and ease of navigation, and I do appreciate Tate Britain for being a smaller museum, as large museums like the V&A can sometimes be overwhelming. Ultimately, I preferred the collection of the V&A to that of Tate Britain, and I knew what I was getting with the V&A--it is a traditional museum, whereas Tate Britain hasn't really figured out what it is.

6. Object of Appreciation: My favorite object at Tate Britain was a painting from the romantics exhibit. This exhibit in general was my favorite for multiple reasons. I loved the layout, the deep blue wall color, the gold frames, and of course the beautiful paintings, especially those by JMW Turner. The painting that spoke most directly to me was “War. The Exile and the Rock Limpet” by JMW Turner, dated 1842. First and foremost, I love this painting because the subject matter is Napoleon Bonaparte during his exile to the island of St. Helena. As a history major, Napoleon is my all-time favorite historical figure, so I am automatically drawn to any piece of art with his image. Aside from the subject matter, I love the bold, warm colors. Although the figure of Napoleon looks dejected and defeated, the rich color of the painting reflects his reign and his personality, at least to me. Of course, the red and black are symbols of the carnage of his wars across Europe, as well. It is hope and despair all in one, and I would love to return to this piece.