![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Last night I went to a great exhibit, the Gustave Courbet retrospective at the Met.
I'd seen a few of these before at the Met and at Smith, but this was a big, impressive show. I wish I could speak intelligently about art, but alas I can't. Actually, the moment that stands out to be was when I asked I, with whom I went, "Do you want to get an audio tour?" She looked at me as if I'd said, "Do you want to smear peanut butter on the paintings?"
I've been to a lot of museums with I over the years, but apparently had never asked this most hideous of questions. "No!" she cried. "You look at paintings! You don't have someone tell you what you're looking at! If it were up to me I would banish them. And also these!" She points violently at the cards next to the painting that tell you something about it. She was also disappointed in the new European galleries--the museum has a lot more paintings out now, but they did it by carving big rooms into smaller ones, until it really is a lot like looking at somebody's stamp collection. "You can't even walk back far enough to get a good look at the painting without running into a bench," she says, then more grumpily, "but then, who needs to look at the painting from a distance? You just have to be close enough to read the WORDS on the card that TELL YOU WHAT YOU'RE SEEING FOR YOU! It's a symbol, not a sign!!! SYMBOL, NOT SIGN!!"
Ah, it was like I was meeting her in X-Files fandom all over again.:-)
This actually made me think about reading those little cards. I've been going to museums since I was really little and I think I started reading them because I thought it made me look mature. Seriously--because as a kid it would sort of be like...how long am I supposed to stare at these paintings? Sure some of them I'd want to look at a lot, but sometimes you just want to get to the cafeteria. But I always wanted to look mature so I started reading the cards, schooling my face into a look that hopefully said: "Very interesting. How delightfully enlightning! Ah, I thought as much about this painting. Dreamy and sardonic gaze. Yes."
It makes me want to take one of the courses I has taught--like the one where she apparently made students sit in front of a single painting for over and hour and then write about how they felt and what they were seeing.
Anyway, the point is the paintings really are great. Realistic, but with a surreal twist--my favorite! Like this one, that I got a print of, The Desperate Man:
Isn't that great? Especially that everybody walks up to it and the first thing they say is, "OMG, Johnny Depp!" If they ever make a movie of his life, JP would be great.
I's favorite painting in the museum is already a Courbet, Woman with a Parrot:
Looking at it last night made me think about that Project Runway Met challenge--I want somebody to make a dress out of this painting. Maybe Jillian. Or Christian. It seems like the dress should mostly be ivory, like the woman's skin, and giving the impression of pink nudity as well, but then there's be parrot color swirling around it or peeking out in different places, because the paintings got a swooping feeling? Like I likes it because first, the woman has hair like hers, more importantly, she's not fainting or fallen, she's very active even though she's lying down. There's a modern dance-quality to her pose, and then her hand is lifting up to this bird--also like a dance pose.
Then there's Courbet's most notorious work--and there were a lot to choose from in his catalog: The Origin of the World. I felt like I had new appreciation for it since being on livejournal where people actually post X-rated art and appreciate it. The painting's awesome--I almost think you lose something seeing it reproduced rather than in person. There's a cover to it that he had his brother paint that looks like a landscape sketched in white lines--but it sort of follows the contours of the painting it's hiding. When you pull back the cover you get--voila! The Origin of the World! Which he could also have called Cunt!!!111!!:-DDDD
You can see it here.
It's just kind of cool to look at a big picture of a vagina and get the feeling of: Yay this!!! Especially with that title because, yeah, that's totally what it is!
So the upshot is: Gustave Courbet: Good show according to me.
I'd seen a few of these before at the Met and at Smith, but this was a big, impressive show. I wish I could speak intelligently about art, but alas I can't. Actually, the moment that stands out to be was when I asked I, with whom I went, "Do you want to get an audio tour?" She looked at me as if I'd said, "Do you want to smear peanut butter on the paintings?"
I've been to a lot of museums with I over the years, but apparently had never asked this most hideous of questions. "No!" she cried. "You look at paintings! You don't have someone tell you what you're looking at! If it were up to me I would banish them. And also these!" She points violently at the cards next to the painting that tell you something about it. She was also disappointed in the new European galleries--the museum has a lot more paintings out now, but they did it by carving big rooms into smaller ones, until it really is a lot like looking at somebody's stamp collection. "You can't even walk back far enough to get a good look at the painting without running into a bench," she says, then more grumpily, "but then, who needs to look at the painting from a distance? You just have to be close enough to read the WORDS on the card that TELL YOU WHAT YOU'RE SEEING FOR YOU! It's a symbol, not a sign!!! SYMBOL, NOT SIGN!!"
Ah, it was like I was meeting her in X-Files fandom all over again.:-)
This actually made me think about reading those little cards. I've been going to museums since I was really little and I think I started reading them because I thought it made me look mature. Seriously--because as a kid it would sort of be like...how long am I supposed to stare at these paintings? Sure some of them I'd want to look at a lot, but sometimes you just want to get to the cafeteria. But I always wanted to look mature so I started reading the cards, schooling my face into a look that hopefully said: "Very interesting. How delightfully enlightning! Ah, I thought as much about this painting. Dreamy and sardonic gaze. Yes."
It makes me want to take one of the courses I has taught--like the one where she apparently made students sit in front of a single painting for over and hour and then write about how they felt and what they were seeing.
Anyway, the point is the paintings really are great. Realistic, but with a surreal twist--my favorite! Like this one, that I got a print of, The Desperate Man:
Isn't that great? Especially that everybody walks up to it and the first thing they say is, "OMG, Johnny Depp!" If they ever make a movie of his life, JP would be great.
I's favorite painting in the museum is already a Courbet, Woman with a Parrot:
Looking at it last night made me think about that Project Runway Met challenge--I want somebody to make a dress out of this painting. Maybe Jillian. Or Christian. It seems like the dress should mostly be ivory, like the woman's skin, and giving the impression of pink nudity as well, but then there's be parrot color swirling around it or peeking out in different places, because the paintings got a swooping feeling? Like I likes it because first, the woman has hair like hers, more importantly, she's not fainting or fallen, she's very active even though she's lying down. There's a modern dance-quality to her pose, and then her hand is lifting up to this bird--also like a dance pose.
Then there's Courbet's most notorious work--and there were a lot to choose from in his catalog: The Origin of the World. I felt like I had new appreciation for it since being on livejournal where people actually post X-rated art and appreciate it. The painting's awesome--I almost think you lose something seeing it reproduced rather than in person. There's a cover to it that he had his brother paint that looks like a landscape sketched in white lines--but it sort of follows the contours of the painting it's hiding. When you pull back the cover you get--voila! The Origin of the World! Which he could also have called Cunt!!!111!!:-DDDD
You can see it here.
It's just kind of cool to look at a big picture of a vagina and get the feeling of: Yay this!!! Especially with that title because, yeah, that's totally what it is!
So the upshot is: Gustave Courbet: Good show according to me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I didn't really know this guy either--I'd seen some of his paintings because I recognized them, especially Parrot and another one that was at Smith--"Preparation of the Bride/Dead Girl" and a couple others, but I think he's a favorite now.:-)
From:
no subject
I'd heard the name before, but wouldn't have been able to think of a painting by him. At least nothing in the style you've posted. I kind of associated landscapes and genre-paintings with the name - LOL.
Especially that everybody walks up to it and the first thing they say is, "OMG, Johnny Depp!"
I instantly thought 'Johnny Depp', too - LOLOL! :D
more importantly, she's not fainting or fallen, she's very active even though she's lying down.
That's because she's being fucked. Or is about to be fucked. :P Can't make up my mind which, though the direction of her movement implies the latter, IMO.
But her posture as well as the metaphoric bird hovering over her are quite clear, I think. :D
Wow to the 'Origin of the world' image. I'd never seen it, but when you google 'Courbet', the image results are full of it.
It's like an anatomist study, but I like the idea of the title. :)
I enjoyed reading about your museum experiences and your friend's attitude to museums and their exhibits - LOL. :D (Can't say I agree much with her, though. ;) )
Yes, I think that looking at paintings is something that has to grow on you.
I like to look at the picture first, and read the labels when I find a painting interesting. If I do, I'll want to know who painted it (if it's not an exhibition dedicated to one artist, you'll find loads of different artists side by side), when, and using what technique etc, and what the subject is (if I can't tell). And if it's a subject I don't know, I like it if the label tells me more about it (e.g., if the title says something like: 'The Delphic Oracle promising victory to Alcmaeon', and I go 'huh?' ;) ).
So, yes to labels! :D
From:
no subject
That's because she's being fucked. Or is about to be fucked. :P Can't make up my mind which, though the direction of her movement implies the latter, IMO.
But her posture as well as the metaphoric bird hovering over her are quite clear, I think. :D
That does look like it, doesn't it? He's very fond of the abuot to me or sometimes "just as been" fucked.
She says it's okay to read about the paintings once you've looked at them for yourself. She's sent me a slew of articles about the show now that we've seen it!
From:
no subject
Totally agree you need to make that dress.
From:
It's damn good geometry!
You can write something people can read after they've seen the art for themselves and come to their own conclusions. Then it's okay.:-)
From:
no subject
And that one does look like Johnny Depp!
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Johnny Depp's resemblance to Courbet in The Desperate Man was a favorite topic of conversation in my Art History class last year. :)
I read the labels when I think the painting is interesting and I don't know a lot about the artist/work - or when I know too much and I want to make sure they got it right.
From:
no subject
I hope you enjoy the exhibit. I think you will!
From:
no subject
Maybe there's slash and time travel involved, hmm?
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
"You can't even walk back far enough to get a good look at the painting without running into a bench," she says, then more grumpily, "but then, who needs to look at the painting from a distance? You just have to be close enough to read the WORDS on the card that TELL YOU WHAT YOU'RE SEEING FOR YOU! It's a symbol, not a sign!!! SYMBOL, NOT SIGN!!"
Hee! I definitely sympathize with her w/r/t always bumping into the benches as I move back for the ~scenic view~! But I do read the wee little cards as well, when I get a chance. Usually there's too many people bunched up together next to the card trying to read the tiny type.
From:
no subject