confessions of a distracted muse

Home Blog Photos Video Music Calendar Reviews Recipes Links

Dec 23, '07 5:39 AM
for everyone

Kurt Schwitter's Picture with Light Center (1919). It can be seen at The Museum of Modern Art in New York City.

Today Michael is hosting Art Sunday and his theme suggestion was art that you don't understand, art that confuses you. You'd think that would be easy? HA ! I'm the nut that adores Dali and avant garde sculpture and cubism and abstacts. However I must admit I've tried to feature Dadaism on Art Sunday so very many times only to scratch my head and wonder what???

Max Ernst's The Kiss (1927) as can be seen at The Guggenheim in New York City.

It's not that I actively dislike these but rather I wonder what is missing that would cause me *to* embrace them. I love the colors of this one but the lines are a bit *off* for me. Why Kandinsky and not this? The lines ... I love the lines in Kandinsky's works but the lines here seem a bit disorganized and without focus.

George Grosz's Metropolis (1917) which can be seen at The Museum of Modern Art in New York City.

This one might appeal to a great many people and you might think *too much red*? No - I just don't care for caricature art.

Have you notcied that The Museum of Modern Art and The Guggenheim are the favored venues for these pieces? It's because I knew those were my favorite places to find modern art online.

This is Jean Art's Overturned Blue Shoe with Two Heels Under a Black Vault (1925) The Guggenheim New York City.

This *should* have been a prime example of abstract art (sculpture?) that I would adore. Again I can't say exactly why but something is just lacking. Maybe the colors? Maybe the lines? It just doesn't work for me.

This was interesting Michael. By defining characteristics I am not seeing in these pieces I've been better able to explain what I *do* like. If I've offended anyone with my opinions, please remember Art is subjective...it is all in how you see it and WHAT you see in it. I will always embrace Calder, Kandinsky, Dali, Picasso ... I even adore the whimsy of Warhol. Maybe that's what was missing to me -- pieces or influences of the artists I adore.

I *did* however find a few pieces featured in the Dada movement that I enjoyed. I wasn't surprised.

Don't forget to wander over to Michael's Page and take the tour and, as always, Celbrate Art !!

Tags: art sunday, art

Prev: Some more Christmas music
Next: On The Menu - Christmas Brunch

reply share

14 CommentsChronological Reverse Threaded

wickedlyinnocent wrote on Dec 23, '07

I agree about some Dada pieces. Keeping in mind it started as a movement against the conservativism, the bourgeois society and WW1, dliberately based on irrationalism , anarchy and literary nihilism, then I mut be a fan, I do admire the principles, although not always the outcome. The fact it evolved into Surrealism speaks in favour of Dadaism too. Great post Steph, have a wonderful Sunday.

mfhy2k wrote on Dec 23, '07

This is why I like the tours and theme days; you learn things.

highlandrose wrote on Dec 23, '07

See Lina, I like Surrealism. Dadaism just has too much cacophany for me sometimes. Again I know quite odd considering my preferences in art, literature, and music. I hadn't realized it was a movement against the conservatism of WWI and prior ... it makes a bit more sense now. Like you I can embrace the philosophy if not always the outcome and I *did* find some of the later pieces that I enjoyed. The ones I featured -- well not so much.

Michael, its definitelydifferent i must admit. Interesting choice of theme today.

luisguerra wrote on Dec 23, '07

Like that Max

nemo4sun wrote on Dec 23, '07

wonderfull
but sometimes i am without focus

:)

highlandrose wrote on Dec 23, '07

Odd Luis that was my absolute least favorite of the 4. I guess this shows that art truly *is* subjective.

Well said Nemo !

lauritasita wrote on Dec 23, '07

I like the last one, "Overturned Blue Shoe with Two Heels Under a Black Vault." Very confusing, but I like blue, LOL!!!

mfhy2k wrote on Dec 23, '07

I never see anyone discuss art; most people just say they like what ever someone else likes.

fabellina wrote on Dec 23, '07

Of all of them I took a very quick 'head poll' and liked the Max Ernst, despite the fact that I have a tendency not to like anything with blue in it, unless it's sea or sky. I've never liked George Grosz, I find his work ugly and although I did like very much the shapes in Jean Art's Overturned Shoe, again the colours jarred for me - if that shoe comes in red, I'll revise my opinion! Great blog Steph, really refreshing to see someone thinking through about what they don't particularly like and why.

Fantastic to see what has come out of today's subject, I agree with Michael, most of the time we just post about the things we like and people either say they like them or they don't say anything - debate and discussion are GOOD!!

philsgal7759 wrote on Dec 23, '07, edited on Dec 23, '07

The first I am neutral about ther colors are blah but ok white that's light
Just evokes as much emotion as watching paint dry it's boring My apologies to the artist who probably spent days on it All I can muster is a YAWN

The next could grow on me like you said it just seems incomplete. There seems to be at least 2 human forms in it and the colors are actually calming but then I guess it is the lines I think what's that one holding to the left near the black shape? and are there more people in this Are they even supposed to be people? So I see your frustration.

The third too much red the whole thing gives off a nervous feel If that was his intent he succeeded.
It also seems off center.adding to the nervous feeling Hmm I want to look this one up because I think that must be the story behind it.

The last HONESTLY?? looks like he took a piece of paper and either cut construction paper or splattered paint randomly and said that's a shoe and someone said hey it has two heels
and some long thing sticking out of it which if placed right could be seen as the leg but everything is out of kilter.and the black does not seem to add anything to the picture is in fact distracting.

greenwytch wrote on Dec 23, '07

my favorite is also 'the kiss'. perhaps it is a portrait of an unkissed kiss........? the top one reminds me of something i saw in a kaleidescope, but after it was broken. LOL. metropolis makes me think of some might see, if they suffer from social anxiety disorder. isn't that weird? the bottom one is just plain ol' odd. a dinosaur with a broken foot.....or maybe a weird telephone and a blue paw. hehehehe. they sure are interesting pieces! i'd never seen any of them before. thanks for the introduction.

philsgal7759 wrote on Dec 23, '07

Found this in an article on Metropolis
.
The city is not New York, but Berlin, Germany, shortly after the end of World War I.

"As a soldier in the German army, George Grosz experienced the horrors of the war first hand, and even underwent psychiatric treatment for the effect it had on him. America experienced peace after the war. In the Germany shown here, there may be a cessation of military action, but there is no peace. The pressures of economic devastation and the humiliation of defeat drive the population into a seething desperation that feeds upon itself, robbing mankind of its humanity – reversing the benefits of the resurrection by transforming holy, eternal beings into a mob of rabid animals.

These people have been defeated and overrun by an enemy army. They have lost the ability to believe in divine favor; for them, God must be dead. And all that remains is the absence of hope, the absence of faith, the absence of love. This, more than the dynamic life of the metropolis, is the portrait that Grosz has captured. The anxious desperation, the self-delusion, the ugly brutality charge apocalyptically across the canvas."

So actually the painting evokes the very reactions Grosz wished to set on canvas

A feeling that enabled the rise of a man who promised false hope and would make his anxious
Metropolis look like a paradise by comparison.
Tragically the anxiety and despair would lead to the rise of Hitler's Third Reich illicit even more fear and anxiety and lead to the extermination of Jews all over Europe.
In this background I find it actually brilliant and somewhat prophetic of all that would come..

highlandrose wrote on Dec 23, '07

:) Lauritasita :) I think you're the only one who liked The Blue Shoe

Michael it depends -- sometimes we discuss it and sometimes it is 'oooo pretty I like'. I will admit I'm more apt to discuss music but hello? music minor ;)

Francesca, I think Max Ernsts is my least favorite of the bunch. I can't quite explain why but it seems to lack focus. I would like Schwitters if it had bolder colors and shapes.

Philsgal - YAWN sums it up beautifully. I agree with you on all of these truth be told.

Deb, I've wanted before to feature Dadaism and I've just not warmed up to it. After Lina's explanation I have a bit more tolerance though.

Oh thank you for the explanation Philsgal --- I guess this goes to show that knowing where the artist was coming from makes all the difference in the world. I will admit that Metropolis was my favorite of the bunch but I still don't care for caricatures. I can understand the cacophany and disorganization though ... great stuff - thank you :)

dawn4 wrote on Dec 26, '07

I like the first two, although I'm not really sure what it is that attracts me to the second one. I think that's the thing with modern art. I can't really pin point what I like or dislike about it. Like when I went to the MoMA last spring, one painting would catch my eye and then the next peice had me wondering why it was there.

audio reply video reply

Add a Comment

highlandrose

Do you know Stephanie?

Who is on Multiply?

Want to learn more?

Already a Member?

confessions of a distracted muse