Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Art’ Category

I’ve got a bit more information to share about Russell’s participation in the Bushwick Open Studios project.

Russell and his friend Jonathan Donaldson (or JonDon, as Kish likes to call him) will present their show Space Camp in unit 114 on the ground floor of the Loom Building, shown at right, on June 1 and 2 from noon to 7 p.m.  The Loom Building is found at the intersection of Flushing Avenue, Thames Street, and Porter Avenue in Brooklyn.

Their show is described as involving “installation, New Media, painting, Photography, Sculpture, and Works on Paper” and the web page for their show indicates that it will involve “Technology/Electronics/Computers.”  Jon was a classmate of Russell’s at Vassar, and his pieces are really interesting, too.  It goes without saying, of course, that I love Russell’s creative works.

If your orbit puts you in or around NYC on June 1 or 2, I’m sure that a visit to Space Camp would be worth your while.

Read Full Post »

If you’re in the New York City area on June 1 or 2, please drop by the Bushwick neighborhood in Brooklyn and bring your keenest sense of artistic appreciation.

Russell and his friend Jon will be participating in the Bushwick Open Studios free form art show that weekend.  The concept of Bushwick Open Studios is pretty cool.  Artists rent vacant storefronts in the Bushwick neighborhood of Brooklyn and fill them with their art for the weekend.  Visitors then can walk from store to store, checking out the artwork and seeing what the artistic community in Brooklyn has to offer.  Russell and Jon and some of this other artist friends will be displaying their recent work in some of the storefronts.  I’ll post more information about exactly where their storefront will be located as we get closer to the BOS weekend.

Bushwick Open Studios is organized by Arts in Bushwick, “all-volunteer, non-hierarchical” organization in which anyone with time and energy and an interest can take on a leadership role.  Also pretty cool!

Read Full Post »

For the past few months Russell has been deciding where to go to get a Master’s in Fine Arts degree — and yesterday he decided.

This fall he’ll be going to the Cranbrook Academy of Art in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan.  It’s an interesting place with an interesting history.   The Academy is part of the 315-acre Cranbrook Educational Community that was founded by Detroit newspaper owner George Gough Booth and Finnish architect Eliel Saarinen.  The Academy of Art has been home to many artists who have had a significant impact on modern art and culture.

Cranbrook’s mission statement says it offers “an intense studio-based experience where artists-in-residence mentor students in art, architecture and design to creatively influence contemporary culture.”  The painting program “stresses self-exploration and independent work in an atmosphere of ongoing critical discussion involving social, political, and artistic concerns” and “is grounded in the assumption that each student arrives exceptionally motivated and committed to creating art.”  In short:  “The students themselves give form and vitality to the working environment through their energy, diversity, and interaction.”

Life always brings new challenges, and this fall Russell and his artistic vision will welcome the challenge of Cranbrook.  Such new challenges are what make life interesting — and from the parental viewpoint, the fact that he’ll be much closer and we’ll have the chance to visit him on a campus that is a National Historic Landmark isn’t a bad thing, either.

Read Full Post »

IMG_3408Don’t get me wrong — I love bowling.  I’ve bowled for as long as I can remember, starting when UJ and I, as kids, bowled with Grandma and Grandpa Neal.  I like bowling alleys and bowlers, too.

Still, there was something vaguely disturbing about this bit of bowling alley wall art found in the locker area at Wayne Webb’s Columbus Bowl.  It’s not exactly calculated to dispel the common myths about kegling and encourage occasional bowlers to become regulars.

Read Full Post »

IMG_3134We’ve got little kids in our neighborhood, and every once in a while they do something that reminds me of how much fun it was to be a kid.  I came across this little bit of sidewalk graffiti that combines counting up to 100, using different colors, and the utter joy of using chalk on concrete, and it really brought back memories.  I liked the feel of the gritty chalk bumping along the coarse, uneven surface of the sidewalk as we made a drawing or left a message or created a hopscotch outline, and then clapping my hands and smearing my trousers in a futile attempt to get rid of the chalk dust.

Read Full Post »

Museums tend to be pretty stodgy places.  Now there’s a museum in Hobart, Australia that is shaking up the dusty museum world.

The Museum of Old and New Art, or MONA, breaks just about every rule we associate with museums.  Instead of an imposing marble structure, it’s housed in a curious building.  Rather than ascending broad steps, you descend several flights of stairs to get to the exhibit floors.  There are no labels or informational signs prepared by curators on the walls of the museum; visitors get an iPod crammed with information about the exhibits and are asked whether they “love” or “hate” each piece.  And the museum has an on-site brewery and vineyard, too.

MONA features eclectic pieces, such as “living” art consisting of fermenting fruit and agar and a piece that replicates a digestive tract and produces, at 2 p.m. daily, a stinky piece of artistic fecal matter.

I’m not sure why anyone would want to see a turd, no matter how artistically it was produced or presented — we get to see them often enough.  But the idea of shaking up the museum world, and presenting art in different settings, is a good one.  I don’t think I’d travel to Hobart, Australia to see MONA, but I’m still kind of glad it’s there.

Read Full Post »

IMG_3059The Ohio Departments Building was built in 1933, during the depths of the Great Depression.  Many public buildings — typically referred to as WPA (for Works Progress Administration) buildings, whether they in fact were built by the WPA or by one of the other alphabet agencies of the New Deal — were constructed during that time period.  They all have a certain charm and beauty that modern office buildings don’t even try to equal.

I don’t know if this is true about the Ohio Departments Building (later renamed the Ohio Judicial Center) where the Ohio Supreme Court now sits, but I’ve always thought that the WPA buildings were beautiful because countless masons, artists, woodworkers, and other skilled craftsmen were thrown out of work by the Great Depression and were eager to do just about anything that would bring them a paycheck.  Whether my theory is true or not, the Ohio Departments Building is a collection of excellent paintings, splendid wood work, detailed metal fabrication, and colorful tile creations that certainly look like they were the work of masters.  The rear doorway of the Ohio Supreme Court courtroom, shown above, brings many of those art forms together, with the lovely painting of a colonial scene, a fabulous carved wooden wooden clock about the doorway, and fine, gleaming, metal inlaid into the woodwork.  (The Latin phrase below the clock and above the doorway is dum loquor, hora fugit — roughly translated as “while I am speaking, time is fleeing.”  It’s a good reminder for loquacious lawyers.)

The outside of the building, with its clean, bright lines, includes some carved cats and the quasi-Egyptian figure shown below, as well as the customary tribute to the value of labor — a common feature in Depression-era buildings.

IMG_3065

Read Full Post »

IMG_3063The entrance to the Ohio Judicial Center is every bit as lovely as the Ohio Supreme Court courtroom.

Many busy attorneys hurrying to an oral argument no doubt scurry through the entrance without looking around — or looking up.  Those who fail to do so are missing something, because the ceiling above the entrance sparkles with colorful, carefully inlaid tile work (show above), and the doorways feature beautiful, finely detailed metal gate-like doors (shown below).  How much time did it take for the master craftsmen who were involved to place the tiles or do the metalwork that produced such striking pieces?

When people talk about making a grand entrance, this must be what they are talking about.

IMG_3062

Read Full Post »

IMG_3054Today I went over to the Ohio Supreme Court to listen to an oral argument.  While there, I had the chance to enjoy the Supreme Court courtroom and many other splendid features of the Ohio Judicial Center, which was called the Ohio Departments Building when it first opened in 1933.

The building is a graceful structure that is chock full of beautiful features and distinctive touches, and the Supreme Court courtroom is one of the highlights.  It is a magnificent venue for an oral argument before Ohio’s highest court, with walls and ceilings covered with historical murals and classical scenes, rich carpeting and wall hangings, and fine furnishings.  When I was there this morning a high school class was there to watch the argument, and while I thought the students might have been bored by the subject matter — which involved the standards for certifying a case as a class action under Ohio law — they could easily occupy their time gaping at the room.  It definitely conveys the majesty of the law.

There’s a marked contrast between the current courtroom and its immediate predecessor, which was located a few blocks away in the Rhodes Tower.  The Rhodes Tower is a prime example of soulless modern architecture, and the Supreme Court courtroom was a cold, drab, unadorned room that was filled with stone and sharp angles.  The old courtroom always made me feel as if the Politburo was ready to walk out, give a perfunctory wave to the proletariat, and then pronounce judgment on the latest five-year plan.  The “new” courtroom — which of course is older than the “old” courtroom — is a vast improvement.

On my visit today I took some photos of the refurbished building and its trappings.  Above is a picture of the Supreme Court bench and counsel tables, and below is some of the terrific artwork found on the ceiling of the courtroom.  I’ll post some more pictures of the building over the next few days.

IMG_3057

Read Full Post »

tumblr_mgd58un4RF1s2my0bo1_1280Russell has posted some of his new pieces on Tumblr.  I’m sure I’m biased, but I think his new stuff is really quite good.  If you’re so inclined, take a gander.

Given my recent travels, any piece called “Tray Table” — the piece above — is automatically going to be one of my favorites.

Read Full Post »

photo-88I like to get a good night’s sleep.

If I can work in about 7 hours of sack time, I awake refreshed and ready to face the day.  If — as is the case this morning — unfortunate circumstances have prevented the usual amount of slumber, it changes me in ways well captured by this realistic sculpture.  My bulging eyes grow large and have the coarse, gritty consistency of sandpaper.   My tongue hangs out, my breath is fiery, and my mouth is pulled back in an unsightly, fang-filled rictus.  I feel so out of sorts, it wouldn’t surprise me to see that I’ve sprouted a deep red dorsal fin and scaly green skin covered with blue polka dots.

In short, when I don’t get enough sleep at night, I feel pretty monstrous.

Read Full Post »

Lincoln and his cabinet.

Lincoln and his cabinet.

In a scene in the middle of Lincoln, Thaddeus Stevens, a Radical Republican congressman, chides Abraham Lincoln for waiting so long to make an attempt to end slavery.

Lincoln responds that if he had tried to end slavery after the war began in 1861, the border states would have joined the Confederacy, leading to the Union’s defeat and making the chances of emancipation even more remote. Stevens sits there with a defensive expression on his face, unable to offer a rebuttal.

Abraham Lincoln’s character – his blend of compassion and pragmatism – is the focus of Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln, as its title makes clear. Most Civil War epics focus on the great battles between the Union and Confederate armies, but Lincoln concentrates on the role the 16th president played in the great legislative battle over the 13th amendment, which abolished slavery.

Those who pay $9 to see artillery fire and bayonet charges will be disappointed by the film. The few battle scenes are short and brutal, serving only to remind viewers of one of the many pressures weighing on Lincoln’s mind as he decided the best way to end the war.

The ongoing carnage has led the Democrats and the conservative Republicans in the House of Representatives to oppose passage of the 13th amendment out of the fear it will ruin peace negotiations. They pester Lincoln for even bringing up emancipation, while the Radical Republicans pester him for not pressing emancipation hard enough.

In his portrayal of Lincoln, Daniel Day-Lewis plays a man aware that his role in history is to herd his hard-headed colleagues toward emancipation and peace. He does this mostly through slippery legislative techniques we would associate more with LBJ: patronage, cajoling, and even a little bit of dishonesty. Moralizing is used only as a last resort.

Two of Lincoln’s great speeches, the Gettysburg Address and the Second Inaugural, make it into the film, but they seem only rhetorical flourishes for Lincoln’s legislative masterwork. Unseemly political tactics are an essential part of Republican government, in any year; during the Civil War our country was lucky to have a brilliant president who used them to achieve great things.

I could think of no historical character more deserving of a portrayal by Daniel Day-Lewis, with his well-known thoroughness, than the complicated, monumental Lincoln. Ironically, the British actor brings America’s most revered historical figure to life. Instead of the booming voice most Lincoln impersonators use, he employs a more realistic reedy twang. He demonstrates Lincoln’s penchant for funny anecdotes well enough to get my theater laughing a couple times. With saggy eyelids, a slight hunch and a sad smile, he communicates the weariness and the spiritual burdens Lincoln acquired after four years of a wartime presidency.

He also gives him flaws. In scenes of discord with his wife, Mary Todd Lincoln (Sally Field), and his son, Robert Lincoln (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), he shows Lincoln as a man prone to indecision and anger, like the rest of us. Underneath it all, though, is the wisdom and strength of character that made Lincoln such an icon.

A great cast joins Day-Lewis in creating real people out of the historical figures known only through stodgy old photographs and dry academic writing. Sally Field plays Mary Lincoln as a woman so anxious, in large part due to the death of her son Tad shortly before the beginning of the film, that I both felt sorry for her and wanted to avoid her. Gordon-Levitt’s Robert Lincoln is a frustrated young man imprisoned at Harvard by his mother’s worries while he would rather be proving himself on the battlefield.

Thanks to the full-fledged performances and the attention to detail in the sets, costumes, accents and 19th-century lingo, the movie creates such a convincing image of 1865 that it felt like a precious window into the past. The United States of 1865 is a character itself, tired of war and uncomfortable with the great changes it is undergoing. The new capitol building is so blindingly white that it seems both inspiring and awkward amongst the dingy buildings and muddy streets of Washington, D.C. The telegraphs that bring news of the results of battles and their casualties seem to strike the characters as exciting and frightening, and the same could be said of the freed blacks who have just begun serving in the army.

At the end of the movie, when I stepped out of the theater into the parking lot, I felt like I had returned from a trip to the past. I was conscious of the fact that I and my surroundings were products of the historical currents portrayed in the movie. Some characters in the movie, including Lincoln, ask what America should be like after the war ends, how it can heal the scars of slavery. Stepping back into modern-day America, I had an opportunity to examine the way the United States chose to proceed from their eyes.

Read Full Post »

It’s always sad when a killer frost does its dirty work and our patio flowers die — but even after they go to the Great Garden In The Sky, the blooms can retain a certain subtle beauty.  This fall, our dead yellow zinnias have a distinctly impressionistic feel, as they cling to the last drop of their once vivid colors.

Read Full Post »

I like some public art and I dislike other public art — but at least I can usually understand what the art is attempting to convey.  No more!  A new bit of public art in Columbus has me stumped.

It’s the creation of a Brooklyn artist named Janet Zweig, and it appears on a wall behind the Key Bank building in downtown Columbus.  It’s a series of unadorned words on an otherwise blank wall.  The first five words were selected by Zweig, they were “Columbus never came here, but . . . “  Every two weeks or so, new words, suggested by Columbus residents and visitors and chosen by Zweig and curators of the piece, have been added to the wall.  A statement accompanying the piece explains:  “Generative text can tap into an unconscious that often discovers hidden, insightful, poetic, and sometimes humorous truths.”  The new words are selected in an attempt to shift the meaning of the words, and the stated “goal is to change the meaning of the sentence (or sentences) each time a new section is added, in an attempt ultimately to capture the soul of Columbus, as described by its residents.”

I’m not sure words on a wall could ever “capture the soul of Columbus,” but if these words have done so Columbus must have the soul of bathroom graffitist or an adolescent who thinks “Mad Libs” are hilarious.  Does anyone from Columbus actually think this piece reflects well on our fair city?

Read Full Post »

On Sunday, at London’s Tate Modern Art Museum, a visitor walked up to the Mark Rothko painting Black on Maroon and boldly wrote some words on the painting in black paint, then left the museum.

Today a Russian named Vladimir Umamets claimed responsibility for the act, but said it was not an act of vandalism.  According to the BBC, he was later was arrested and held on suspicion of causing criminal damage.  The BBC also reports that Umamets claims to be the founder of a “movement” called “Yellowism,” which apparently posits that “Art allows us to take what someone’s done and put a new message on it.”

I don’t know if there really is a “movement” called Yellowism, as opposed to one nutty jerk seeking to justify an otherwise senseless act of artistic destruction, but his philosophy is asinine.  Part of the joy of art is its aspirational aspect.  People appreciate art that reflects great talent that they don’t possess.  Anyone who thinks a great painting is just a canvas for their personal aggrandizement is just piggybacking on greatness they could never achieve on their own talent.

What would happen if every museum patron felt free to scrawl whatever they pleased on a Rothko — or the Mona Lisa?  It wouldn’t be long before a Rothko ceased to be a Rothko and instead became a patch of random graffiti.  If I wanted to see that, I would book a flight for inner city Detroit.  Come to think of it, that might be a suitable punishment for whomever actually defaced the painting:  sentence them to a few years scrubbing away the graffiti in British toilets.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,131 other followers