Archives for August 2011

In tomorrow’s Wall Street Journal, I have a short Icon piece on an icicle that’s in high demand.

That would be, of course, Dale Chihuly’s Lime Green Icicle Tower, which is part of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston’s exhibition, Chihuly: Through the Looking Glass. As the museum’s director Malcolm Rogers well knew when they programmed this show, it is very popular — sure to be the museum’s fifth most popular exhibit when it closes on Monday, a day after the original planned closed. Chihuly’s work is loved by a lot of people, even if art critics disagree.

What made the icicle newsworthy was the MFA’s public appeal for funds to purchase it — people kept asking Rogers if the museum would keep it, so they put a collection box nearby, sent an email appeal, and began a texting campaign. I’ve got more details in the story, which I won’t repeat here. But other museums might learn from this.

Meantime, there are other things to say about this — and they are not necessarily good.

MFA has used public appeals for money to buy an artwork only twice before — once, in the late 1940s, when it received more than 700 donations to buy Paul Revere’s Sons of Liberty Bowl, and again in 1979-80, when the Boston Athenaeum tried to sell Gilbert Stuart portraits of George and Martha Washington to the Smithsonian. Instead, with public support, the MFA reached an agreement to share ownership of the two works and rotate their appearances in the museums. And now, Chihuly…changing tastes? Or perhaps just opportunity knocking and a quick response. I think the latter.

Right?  

Ok, back to what I saw on my vacation — who is the most popular visual artist in Iceland?

The answer would not have occurred to me either, even after I saw a show of his work at the Reykjavik Art Museum. I was underwhelmed.

The next day, I visited the National Gallery of Iceland, which had two exhibitions on view. One showased work by Louise Bourgeois, and included a nice big (but not huge) spider, plus several other interesting works and many no-so-interesting drawings.

Across the hall was a show devoted to Jóhannes Sveinsson Kjarval, the same painter whose work was on view at the Reykjavik Art Museum. A (mostly) landscape painter who lived from 1885 to 1972, Kjarval — interestingly — has the same sort of reputation online as my initial judgment. That is, according to a brief entry on Wikipedia, his painting “vary greatly in style,” which has earned him criticism.

My first exposure was only confirmed by the second, larger exhibition. Kjarval clearly had talent, but he moved through many styles without, judging by two exhibitions, ever really developing something wonderful of his own.

When I looked him up, I discovered that Icelanders like his art, perhaps partly because he painted elves, trolls and characters in their island’s sagas. That may also explain why he is depicted on the 2000 krona bank note. (Bjork also wrote a flute tribute to him, and recorded it for her first album.) I also learned that what I called the main branch of the Reykjavik Art Museum here is named the Kjarvalsstaðir, after him.

According to Art-Iceland, “He was a bohemian and a romantic, never had much money and lived by the day giving away his paintings to receive food and shelter….He always appreciated the delicate Icelandic nature, with its ever changing colours, the moss, the lava, the arctic light and changing weather.” Use that link above to see some of his works; I’ve posted just a few here. Women by the Spring, n.d., is at left above; Icelandic Melody, 1959, is at right.

Tell me if I’m missing something.

Ok, we’re all more interested in art that has and does emanate from France than we are from, say, Iceland, so before I deliver part two about my recent visit to museums in Iceland, here’s an item about France.

Museyon Guides has just released a travel guidebook called Art + Paris: Impressionists and Post-Impressionists: The Ultimate Guide to Artists, Paintings and Places in Paris and Normandy. It’s a small, useful paperback that includes images of 150 celebrated paintings by the likes of Renoir, Degas, Manet and Monet, along with historical background of their time and some walking tours of Paris and the French countryside areas they depicted.

Art aficionados may not “need” this book — it’s pretty basic — but it does offer information you may want while you travel in one place. And for today’s reader, such as they are, the book offers information in small bites.

For example, for each of the eight main artists in the book, there’s a timeline, reprpductions of his works, and a Did You Know section?

Did you know:

• that van Gogh most respected Monet among the Impressionists?
• that Cezanne was declared a draft dodger?
• that Renoir asked his son for a modest grave, not “too heavy a stone”?

And so on. Next comes guides to the relevant museums (and it’s interesting to see what pictures are pointed out), and finally the feature that are probably most of interest to RCA readers — the walking tours. There are eight in Paris and seven sections on places outside Paris, like Rouen and Giverny.

Art + Paris: Impressionists and Post-Impressionists: The Ultimate Guide to Artists, Paintings and Places in Paris and Normandy doesn’t break new ground, true. But if you don’t think it’s the right book for you, I’d bet one of your friends would love it. And I’m all for spreading the word about art.

Museyon publishes a lot of guides about obsessions, with Art + Travel being one of them.

Today’s hearing for the petition filed by Friends of the Barnes Foundation in Montgomery County Orphans’ Court before Judge Stanley Ott lasted about two hours, and it was jammed with spectators.

As expected, the attorney for the Barnes Foundation itself, Ralph Wellington, argued that the group had no standing to sue, and that their attorney, Samuel Stretton, had misconstrued the duty of then Pennsylvania Attorney General Mike Fisher.

The Main Line Times has a video of Stretton arguing back, outside of court, here. And here’s the AP story filed after the hearing.

Ott didn’t say when he would rule, but it will take big man to admit he was wrong in the past; he approved the move in 2004 and again a few years later. Several reports says it is expected by the end of the month.

But I expect the Barnes Friends to be tenacious, as long as they have money to keep the case alive in the courts.

Meantime, construction continues on the new Barnes, in Philadelphia, and the establishment tries to ignore the Friends’ petitions. The Philadelphia Inquirer showed its lack of interest by running only the AP story, not sending a reporter of its own.

UPDATE: Ok, now the Inquirer has weighed in with its own report, adding a few details about the advocates’ arguments.