Art History Newsletter » Leslie Thompson

German Impressionism

Leslie Thompson — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 23:39:54 +0000

When you hear “Impressionism” you think of French masters like Renoir or Monet, right? A current exhibition at the MFAH reminds us that the movement thrived in Germany as well (although 20 years after its inception in France). German Impressionist Landscape Painting focuses on the paintings of the group’s “triumvirate” – Max Liebermann, Lovis Corinth, and Max Slevogt. While similar in style to the French, these examples of German Impressionism display a Deutschland spirit, at times evident in the landscapes depicted or the use of darker hues.

In a nearby gallery, the MFAH has intelligently organized an intimate exhibition of drawings of Liebermann, Corinth, and Slevogt. This juxtaposition allows viewers to experience the artists’ translations from creative beginnings to finished masterpiece.

Even to a student of art history, this exhibition was a revelation. What other art treasures is Europe hiding?

Rachel Whiteread

Leslie Thompson — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:41:53 +0000

I recently ventured to the Nasher Sculpture Center in Dallas to view the Rachel Whiteread exhibition, the first museum retrospective of her drawings. Immediately upon entering the gallery, I felt uncomfortable. What is bothering me about this show? Is it the layout, the work, the theme? Then it dawned on me: it’s the lighting! When exhibiting drawings, museums must use very low lighting. All of the windows and ceilings (which is basically one large skylight) were covered. I am accustomed to the bright, open spaces at the Nasher. In a way, it had felt like life had been eradicated from the galleries.

Environment has such a large impact on how the viewer experiences a work of art. Just as Whiteread uses her drawings to help her “choreograph a space,” a museum uses the gallery space to facilitate one’s reception of an exhibition. Should my appreciation be unwavering? Or do we all succumb to the power of the museum?

Tuymans

Leslie Thompson — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 15:56:06 +0000

Last night the Dallas Museum of Art presented a talk with Luc Tuymans. The DMA recently opened the first US retrospective of the artist (organized by the Wexner and SFMOMA). I enjoy how the subdued palette of his work combined with the paintings’ subject matter produces a feeling that lingers, or haunts the viewer (like a memory).

Something from Tuymans’ talk that resonated was in his discussion of referencing the horrors of history in his paintings (whether it be the effects of WWII, post-colonial Congo, the global aftermath of 9/11, etc). As an artist working with these subjects, he paints not as a way to come to terms with the events. One can never come to terms; that’s not the point- he says. The point is not to obliterate these emotional events of history, these inhumanities, from culture. We cannot choose our history.

While Tuymans doesn’t think art should be full of political content (propoganda), his paintings definitely become politically charged (so many examples: Lumumba (2000), The Secretary of State (2005) and Gas Chamber (1986) to name a few).

Bibliography In The 21st Century

Leslie Thompson — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:24:17 +0000

The shaky future of the Bibliography of the History of Art.

In the meantime, since April 1, the Getty has announced it would offer free public access to the bibliography through its website.

Touching Art: Video Paintings

Leslie Thompson — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:23:57 +0000

With the integration of technology and electronic media in art, new issues in contemporary art continue to arise. A recent encounter with such type art has raised a particular question for me.

The Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth currently has on view a FOCUS show of American-born artist Ben Jones:

Jones’ work investigates new methods of pictorial storytelling in the digital age. An interdisciplinary artist working in video, sculpture, painting, light painting and drawing, his artworks and installations evoke environments and themes both familiar and bizarre.

In one of the galleries hangs MS Video Painting II, 2010 (canvas, gouache, DVD), a canvas painted in a somewhat op art fashion with stripes and flat shapes , a completed work in itself. Suspended opposite the canvas is a projector that projects moving designs in light, altering the appearance of the painted composition. Thus the canvas becomes a different work of art. (Edit: Both images courtesy of Amanda Potter’s iPhone.)

Now, most museum collections are not for touching. (Although within the last several years, the visually disabled have challenged these restrictions to allow a multi-sensory experience.) Some artwork relies on the viewer’s participation, as with the growing phenomenon of interactive art. Yet, with this particular piece, if one were to block the light from the projector, whether intentionally or accidentally, one would be changing the composition, altering the entire piece. While the viewer is not physically contacting the painting, is he/she still considered to be touching the art? Where are the boundaries in such work?

‘I Bought Andy Warhol’

Leslie Thompson — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:02:07 +0000

Although not a recent publication (2003), Richard Polsky’s I Bought Andy Warhol is worth a read. As someone who normally focuses more on the museum side of the art world, I enjoyed this insider’s take of the contemporary art market. While his chief pursuit centers on the prolific work of Warhol, Polsky enlightens us “outsiders” more generally on the world of art dealers. Readers learn not only the basic procedures of art auctions and challenges in landing deals, but also encounter the many personalities and characters of the dealers and collectors with whom Polsky interacts. No surprise, money is the theme of this narrative (which makes me cringe).

While a large sum of museums’ collections comprise of gifts from private collectors, I’m curious about the extent to which museums play the art market.