Gugghenheim exibition.
Maggie
all good.
And it's only $7 with a student id.
Mags
Happiness makes you happy.
dale houstman
Maggie <mk...@is9.nyu.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.3.96.990927...@is9.nyu.edu...
> Anybody seen the exibition at the "spiral museum" yet? All surrealist,
> all good.
> And it's only $7 with a student id.
It's hard to see it here from Minneapolis (especially when it is cloudy).
However I might mention that museums are mausoleums, and that only the
captured pelt of surrealism can be beheld in them. Interesting in its way of
course, but an archaeological and not a living experience of surrealism as
is. The more intriguing and challenging work of surrealism is being done
every day out on the streets. Wave to them as you go by.
Museums do for art what zoos do for animals: it is at best an ambiguous
experience. Surely the beasts are perserved, but (in some ways) this
preservation makes elimination in the wild easier for humankind to swallow:
"we're doing everything we can for the poor things." Also enshrined art is
used as a benchwater mark for the philistines: so Guliani can attempt his
little bit of fascistic censorship by power by alluding to "real art" (in
his case, probably the Sunday funnies plus a few half-recalled images from
his Bible stories book). In a very real sense, caged art is often used to
hit living artists over the head, and to make comments about cultural decay:
the first step before bringing out the troopers and Defenders of Catholic
Sensibility Boards.
There was a Surrealist/Dada exhibit here a few years ago and (despite my
blurt above) I attended. There was one of Joseph Cornell's short films,
which I otherwise wouldn't have ever seen. But they also had one of the
endless copies of Duchamp's "Why Not Sneeze?" (the little cage with marble
cubes). It's a marvelous image of course, but it look defeated here, and was
a copy. The copying doesn't bother me much: Duchamp made a fetish of it
himself, and his work scarcely depends upon its materials. The point is that
Dada in a museum is as depressing as an elephant in a tutu. One can too
easily go away wondering what the fuss could ever have been about? A true
Dadaist exhibit would end with the Guggenheim burning down to the ground and
being replaced with a whorehouse full of the same art.
But - no - I haven't. What's in it?
DMH
Mags
What's in it? Well, if you were considered a surrealist and if you were
famous (or had weird mustache), you're there.
You can read about it on the museum's website, which can be easily found
through any search engine.
M.
dale houstman
> What's in it? Well, if you were considered a surrealist and if you were
> famous (or had weird mustache)
Leroy Niemann? Santa Claus? Adolph Hitler? Jerry Colonna? Yosemite Sam?
Me?
DMH
Mags
appeals to the tastes of the snobbish NYC community.
On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, dale houstman wrote:
Happiness makes you happy.
dale houstman
barrett john erickson <bar...@magneticfields.org> wrote in message
news:5nQH3.1041$L85....@ptah.visi.com...
> dale houstman <dm...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:7sofk9$acc$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
> >
>
> were you referring to "Duchamp's Leg" at the Walker?
I really think it was an exhibit meant to demonstrate the very real
connection between American Expressionism and surrealism, but that wouldn't
explain Cornell would it? I'm probably getting more than one exhibt mixed
up, but they were all at the Walker at any rate.
>
> what i found most pathetic about this was that film loop Warhol did of a
> static Duchamp staring into the camera (and out at us witless consumers
from
> the confines of a 27" TV built in flush with the wall) like a captured
> unicorn dying of ironic boredom.
Ooh that was bad. I couldn't watch it for very long. The strange thing here
is how little Warhol has in common with Duchamp, a wonderfully amusing if
dry man, whose rejection of celebrity seems so refreshing after the full
nose-dive into star shit that Warhol perfected. Hell - it's all itronic
though, ain't it?
Warhol is dead
Art went to his head
And fell out his ear
Assassins are near!
Warhol is gone
But the soup is still on
It cools in his bier
Assassins are near!
DMH
barrett john erickson
news:7sofk9$acc$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
>
>
> blurt above) I attended. There was one of Joseph Cornell's short films,
> which I otherwise wouldn't have ever seen. But they also had one of the
> endless copies of Duchamp's "Why Not Sneeze?" (the little cage with marble
> cubes). It's a marvelous image of course, but it look defeated here, and
was
> a copy. The copying doesn't bother me much: Duchamp made a fetish of it
> himself, and his work scarcely depends upon its materials. The point is
that
> Dada in a museum is as depressing as an elephant in a tutu. One can too
> easily go away wondering what the fuss could ever have been about? A true
> Dadaist exhibit would end with the Guggenheim burning down to the ground
and
> being replaced with a whorehouse full of the same art.
and a true surrealist exhibit would begin with roller derby on the ramp and
a nude trapeze act over the central court and end with special staging by
the "surveillance camera players" of "the rape of guiliani by joan d'arc" in
the center of a busy manhattan intersection.
were you referring to "Duchamp's Leg" at the Walker?
what i found most pathetic about this was that film loop Warhol did of a
static Duchamp staring into the camera (and out at us witless consumers from
the confines of a 27" TV built in flush with the wall) like a captured
unicorn dying of ironic boredom.
surrealist artifacts were/are interesting, and i have no problem with people
going to see them whenever and wherever they can. but they are blatantly
out of place in a museum and that shouldn't be allowed to go unnoticed.
[ an even worse example of what you speak was the Fluxus show. ]
-- barrett
bar...@MagneticFields.org
http://www.MagneticFields.org/
==============================================
"Everything tends to make us believe that there exists a
certain point of the mind at which life and death, the real and
the imagined, past and future, the communicable and the
incommunicable, high and low, cease to be perceived as
contradictions."
...André Breton
==============================================