February 18, 2010

At the Late Night Notes Café...

DSC07642

... you can always find one more detail to observe and describe.

12 comments:

Lem said...

Tiger will speak at 11 am tomorrow.

EDH said...

Is it the elevated placement of the artwork, or is it protocol for that museum to have your nose turned up like a snob?

Not that snobs can't be hot.

Methadras said...

I am a big fan of art, not of museums that house them. The pretentiousness of it all. Yeah, yeah, it's a paradise to explore beauty and philosophize on life and its meaning, but still pretentious.

Joan said...

Lysacek!

rhhardin said...

This doggie vid isn't bad.

via theospark

edutcher said...

EDH said...

Is it the elevated placement of the artwork, or is it protocol for that museum to have your nose turned up like a snob?

It's so you don't throw your back out bending over to see it.

Methadras said...

I am a big fan of art, not of museums that house them. The pretentiousness of it all. Yeah, yeah, it's a paradise to explore beauty and philosophize on life and its meaning, but still pretentious.

The "modern" ones, perhaps, but some of the old ones (pre WWI) are works of art in themselves.

traditionalguy said...

Maybe the settings at art museums have to take into account the large crowds milling around like at a subway stop platform. It happens on the last days of a visiting exhibit.

HKatz said...

Who is the image on the far wall? The lady descending the stairs?

Jake said...

Whatever happened to all those cute girls in my Art 101 class who went on to be Art History majors and who I use to see at the Met looking all serious and knowledgeable. I know one went on to be the curator at the Mellon Collection at Yale (until recently), but the rest? Suppose they are all former investment bankers now running skin care product web sites?

Sarah said...

I love the little girl in this picture - no parent to be seen, just enjoying a piece of artwork. I wonder what piece is so interesting to her.

Skyler said...

I'm no expert in art. In fact, I'm convinced that most modern "art" can really be best explained as a method of laundering money. How else can you justify gargantuan chunks of steel untalentedly bolted and welded together being erected throughout so many cities?

But I will say this. I went to the Huntington Museum with a friend one time, expecting to be bored out of my skull. She kept telling me about the "Boy in Blue" and I kept looking at pictures of it in the brochure and wondering what the big deal was.

Huntington Museum is on beautiful land, and the buildings are wonderful too. So put me in for agreeing with edutcher on that point about older art museums have a different ambience.

The real shocker was the Boy in Blue. There is no way to convey its power in a photograph. I was blown away by how beautiful it was. I must have sat and stared at it for a half hour.

I've never seen any modern art that can compare. It's a shame that our culture of nihilism has created such a prevalence of ugly, inartful Pollacks and Warhols -- and usually much worse.

I once dated a woman who was an artist. She got terrible grades in college because her professor wanted her to be more modern. Finally she turned in an assignment that she purposely made as ugly and paint splattered as she could. Her professor gave her an A and said, "oh, now you finally understand art." What a farce.

Irene said...

Have you all seen the piece in which Jeffrey Rosen proposes that President Obama nominate himself for the next opening on the Supreme Court?