Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Guggenheim Museum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Guggenheim Museum. Show all posts

Friday, June 30, 2017

The Guggenheim's journey into the mystic


Armand Point: The Annunciation or Ancilla Domini (L’Annonciation), 1895
Tempera on panel, 99 x 51 cm
Private collection, courtesy Sotheby’s
Photo: Courtesy Sotheby’s


Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

presents


Open now through October 4



Ferdinand Hodler: The Disappointed Souls (Les âmes déçues), 1892
Oil on canvas, 120 x 299 cm
Kuntsmuseum Bern, Staat Bern
Photo: Courtesy Kuntsmuseum Bern, Staat Bern


"The world is too much with us," wrote William Wordsworth, critiquing new realities wrought in Britain's first Industrial Age. Nearly a century later, French Rosicrucian writer Joséphin Péladan (1858–1918) struck a similar note, creating space for artists seeking refuge from a swiftly-changing Europe through the embrace of classical myth, Biblical narratives, nature's elevating beauty and the more ethereal, spiritual climes of imagination. The Guggenheim's new show, Mystical Symbolism: The Salon de la Rose+Croix, curated by Vivien Greene, samples Symbolist works that appeared in Péladan's annual salon of international works in Paris over its six years, 1892-1897.



Installation view
Photo: David Heald
©Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, 2017


Greene's installation spaces these works in a way that would encourage the sort of concentration and contemplation Péladan surely intended to inspire. But with its wan religious iconography intertwined with pagan flourishes, inert androgyny and women relegated to either virginal or monstrous roles, most of this visual art will likely merit attention mainly for its historical, influential connections to other artistic mediums of the period. I glanced at and breezed by much of it--the familiar (Khnopff, Delville) and the unexpected, such as Charles Maurin's remarkably political painting, The Dawn of Labor--but did find myself lingering with one pencil-and-chalk work on paper.

Armand Point's April or Saint Cecilia (1896) depicts the martyred patron of musicians strumming her harp before a lush cascade of ivy. Point's chiseled modeling of the bones of Cecilia's articulated hands held my eyes once and again. We are meant to notice those bones. Although willowy and idealized in her femininity, Cecilia is neither flattened nor vague and evanescent, unlike so many of the good girls and femmes mystérieuses rendered in Symbolist allegory. She fully inhabits a defined, structured body. And like legendary Orpheus, a subject popular with the Symbolists, she expresses a transcendent power through music.

Audio introduction to the exhibit and related poetry readings: click

Related programming: click

Visitor information: click

Ticketing: click

Guggenheim Museum
1071 Fifth Avenue (between 88th and 89th Streets), Manhattan
(map/directions)

Subscribe in a reader

Friday, February 17, 2017

Play the floor: Dorrance and Young at the Guggenheim

Michelle Dorrance
(photo: Works & Process at the Guggenheim/Jacklyn Meduga)

Audience waiting for the opening
Works & Process: Rotunda Project performance
at the Guggenheim Museum rotunda
(photo: Eva Yaa Asantewaa)


Despite what you might have read, tap dance is not on its last legs. Nor is it at death's door. Not while gifted makers like Michelle Dorrance and Nicholas Van Young still craft new ways to put its legacy and possibilities, its fun and glories in front of ever-expanding audiences like the ones that packed Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum last night for three back-to-back performances for Works & Process: Rotunda Project, the museum's new residency and commissioning initiative.

The opening crowd, for the 6:30 show, was an eager and, it should be noted, overwhelmingly white audience--fairly easy to notice as people climbed and lined the museum's famous helical ramps, single-file, to view the museum's ground floor, the primary area for performance. Seeing the show required standing at the ramp's balconies for about 30 minutes plus the wait time before the show started.

According to a New York Times report, when Dorrance, Young and the troupe got their first go-round at the rotunda, they were shocked to discover its tap-unfriendly acoustics. Ooops.


Above: Claudia Rahardjanoto
Below: Dorrance and Young
(photos: Matthew Murphy)


Well, being smart people, they set to work on this formidable beast and, while perhaps not quite besting it, they created a playful sonic dialogue with it. From the opening boom, boom, boom of Dorrance's straddled drum, to angelic voices spiraling towards the skylight, to Young's body percussion and whistling, to the clack and rumble of batons on the floor, wooden boxes or balustrades, music was made by determined performers, and the audience got a lesson in music as a phenomenon of bodies in motion in space, any space. The charming Young even served as conductor, wordlessly training the audience in a complex score and drawing delighted laughter from us. Ephrat "Bounce" Asherie, the Bessie-nominated b-girl, paired with Matthew "Mega Watts" West to contribute hypnotic breakdance segments like jewels nestled inside settings offered by their colleagues and the gleaming white floor.

Gazing down on that floor for most of the performance gave watchers a view of dancers who resembled worker ants or a crisp marching corps as they executed elaborate geometry and braids of formations. Towards the end, the sixteen dancers strapped on tap shoes, bringing the thunder to platforms and planks of wood: We shall have tap!

And so, they shall. And so shall we.

Performers:

Ephrat "Bounce" Asherie
Elizabeth Burke
Warren Craft
Donovan Dorrance
Michelle Dorrance
Michael Landis
Aaron Marcellus
Carson Murphy
Gabe Winns Ortiz
Claudia Rahardjanoto
Gregory Richardson
Leonardo Sandoval
Byron Tittle
Penelope Wendtlandt
Matthew "Mega Watts" West
Nicholas Van Young

Lighting: Kathy Kaufmann

Works & Process Rotunda Project: Michelle Dorrance with Nicholas Van Young has concluded. For updates on future events in the Guggenheim Works & Process series, click here.

Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum
1071 Fifth Avenue, Manhattan
(map/directions)

Free email subscription
to InfiniteBody

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

The Joyce opens first week of Lucinda Childs repertory

The Lucinda Childs Dance Company’s
Caitlin Scranton, Patrick John O'Neill,
Sharon Milanese and Matt Pardo
in Canto Ostinato
(photo: John Sisley)
Katherine Helen Fisher
in Pastime
(photo: John Sisley)

More than a few times, as I sat watching the Lucinda Childs Dance Company at The Joyce Theater last evening, I thought of abstract painter Agnes Martin. Seeing the Martin retrospective at the Guggenheim Museum, which continues through January 11, demonstrated what I'd always heard about her painting but could never detect from reproductions in books and magazines. Calling her a minimalist doesn't tell the whole story.

You can read between Martin's meticulous, repetitive lines, read the energy, and there's so much there--a range of feeling, of humanity in its complexity painted in, not everything as perfect as first glance might suggest nor is it meant to be so. If you sincerely ask, the works will often show you where to look and what to listen for.

In the case of Lucinda Childs, the cool, remote severity of her physique and persona and her aesthetic of precise grids, repetitive motion and continuously slipping, interweaving geometric patterns might also have been a distraction, albeit a dazzling one. Her dancing, and her dancers's dancing, were and are like airy, graceful cursive script written across space with the aid of frictionless implements. The company, like a surface glance at Martin's brush strokes, reveals no hint of human individuality. In fact, when music drives the dancing--and Childs favors music that roughly upends or irresistibly and endlessly propels things--it can often suggest we read each member of the corps as sleek, high-grade machinery on the move. But what else is present?

The Joyce Theater season's first week highlights five decades of work from repertory as old as Pastime (1963), a Childs solo from her Judson Church days, and as current as this fall's Into View, premiered at UCLA. The second week's program, which I will see on Tuesday, features Dance (1979), the masterful collaboration of Childs, Philip Glass and Sol LeWitt where LeWitt's film of the original cast in action, jumbo images spanning the stage, plays over and with the current troupe.

The selections for this first week are instructive. One draws an impression of an American with that legendary sense of entitlement to open space; one who knows how to hook audiences with springy, lighter-than-air bodies, feet barely claimed by gravity; one winking at people who share her love for the unadorned inner systems of American ballet and Cunningham and, likely, Astaire; people who respond to the wry, sometimes surreal turns of a brilliant mind. All of this looks as glamorous as all get out (see 1993's Concerto, especially). It can knock you over. And the dancers, an elite corps, are on it.

In Canto Ostinato (2015), narrow, vertical lines of light, sliding across the backdrop at varying speeds, create elusive illusions of each member of the ensemble moving in a spatial groove of his or her own depth. Following those hallucinations, Into View--with its unsettling visual image of a tiny, distant sun surrounded by dusty orange haze--appears dynamic enough to be diverting but not much more, a good-enough Lucinda Childs piece. But here I noticed something happening between dancers that I had not seen before. It was fleeting but clear--eye contact and interaction with an unspoken purpose but a force readable past many rows of watchers. Again, I flashed back to Martin, to the feelings carefully stored within the shielding rigor or deflecting haze of her surfaces. I wondered again at the artist's presence: Who goes there?

Lucinda Childs Dance Company continues at The Joyce through December 11 with the following programs:

Program A: Lucinda Childs: A Portrait (1963-2016), now through December 4. Curtain Chat: Wednesday, November 30

Program B: Dance (1979), December 6-11

For schedule details and tickets, click here.

The Joyce Theater
175 Eighth Avenue (corner of 19th Street), Manhattan
(map/directions)

Get your free email subscription
to InfiniteBody.

Sunday, December 14, 2014

Museums and data-mining

When the Art Is Watching You
Museums are mining detailed information from visitors, raising questions about the use of Big Data in the arts
by Ellen Gamerman, The Wall Street Journal, December 11, 2014

Sunday, January 26, 2014

Carrie Mae Weems retrospective at Guggenheim Museum



January 24-May 14
Carrie Mae Weems
A Broad and Expansive Sky—Ancient Rome (from Roaming), 2006
Chromogenic print, 73 x 61 inches (185.4 x 154.9 cm)
Private collection, Portland, Oregon
© Carrie Mae Weems
Carrie Mae Weems
Untitled (Man and mirror) (from Kitchen Table Series), 1990
Gelatin silver print, 27 1/4 x 27 1/4 inches (69.2 x 69.2 cm)
Collection of Eric and Liz Lefkofsky, promised gift to The Art Institute of Chicago
© Carrie Mae Weems
Photo: © The Art Institute of Chicago
New York Times critic Holland Cotter's otherwise admiring review of Carrie Mae Weems: Three Decades of Photography and Video (here) chides the Guggenheim Museum for not devoting its central, spiraling rotunda to Weems. Right now, if you visit the Guggenheim, you'll find that sloping spiral roped off in preparation for the upcoming Italian Futurism, 1909-1944: Reconstructing the Universe and that show's crates filling much of the ground floor.

The original Weems retrospective, curated by Kathryn Delmez, opened in September 2012 at Nashville's Frist Center for the Visual Arts. According to Cotter, the Guggenheim omits some works included in previous stops along the show's tour, and the exhibition has been broken up into galleries scattered over a few floors. Cotter points out that, for a first New York retrospective of Weems's career, thirty years worth of work, the limited selection and spatial placement give this Black American artist, a 2013 MacArthur Fellow, short shrift. Cotter's argument seems all the more reasonable and urgent once you appreciate Weems's entire mission, which is all about visibility--to underscore and creatively document presence and experience against racist, sexist omissions and erasures.

She has done this, magnificently, in a variety of ways. Often putting her own body--at once, deific and down-to-earth--front and center in her photography and video work is the boldest stroke. Whether facing us head-on and meeting our gaze with her own or, by turning her back to the camera, slipping into iconic anonymity as in her dramatic Roaming series, Weems answers a denying world with defiance as if to say, Without my presence, you could not have come to be what you are.
I took a tip from Frida who from her bed painted incessantly--beautifully while Diego scaled the scaffolds to the very top of the world. -- from Weems's text for Not Manet's Type (1997)
Weems claims space for African and Afro-Atlantic realities, for people of African descent, particularly women, and our families and communities within society and its art.

Weems also exerts an artist's right not just to make new stuff but to appropriate existing objects--say, J. T. Zealy's daguerreotypes of "Negroid types" from slavery days--sealing these excavated memories under glass etched in white text, seizing control of how they will be seen and understood. She brings marginalized history to the table just as, in The Kitchen Table Series, she brings everyday eros to the table. Because she locates herself or others in historical time and in dreamtime and in something eerily combining the two--see her 2008 video Constructing History: A Requiem to Mark the Moment--we come to understand that we can do and often do the same.

The Guggenheim show might not have everything it could have or take pride of place in the main gallery, but it does educate and inspire (Guggenheim visitor information). See also Brooklyn Museum's Wangechi Mutu: A Fantastic Journey (closing March 9).

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Coming to the Guggenheim in 2013

Daniel Beaty and Moisés Kaufman
Tallest Tree in the Forest
Sunday, January 13, 7:30pm; Monday, January 14, 3 and 7:30pm
Advance tickets are available for the Works & Process presentation of The Tallest Tree in the Forest. The play, by Obie-Award winning performer and writer Daniel Beaty and Tony- and Emmy-nominated director and playwright Moisés Kaufman, explores the evolution of Paul Robeson as an actor and activist.

Wendy Whelan
Restless Creature
Sunday and Monday, Apr 14 and 15, 7:30pm

Hailed by the New York Times as “America’s greatest contemporary ballerina,” Wendy Whelan performs a Shen Wei solo; a duet with New York City Ballet’s Robbie Fairchild choreographed by Joshua Beamish; and excerpts from Restless Creature, featuring four new duets by Beamish, Kyle Abraham, Brian Brooks, and Alejandro Cerrudo, prior to its premiere at Jacob’s Pillow Dance Festival. Jacob’s Pillow Executive and Artistic Director Ella Baff moderates a discussion with Whelan and the four choreographers.

For a schedule of the entire Works & Process series, click here.

Guggenheim Museum
1071 Fifth Avenue ( at 89th Street), Manhattan
(map/directions)

Monday, March 21, 2011

Artists boycott Abu Dhabi Guggenheim

Artists Boycott Abu Dhabi Guggenheim Over Migrant Workers' Rights
by Julia Furlan, WNYC Culture, March 19, 2011

Monday, November 29, 2010

Art in a time of chaos

Review: Chaos & Classicism at the Guggenheim Museum
by Deborah Feller, DeborahFeller.com, November 28, 2010

Monday, February 22, 2010

Sehgal asks "What is progress?"

Reviewing Tino Sehgal
Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

by Eva Yaa Asantewaa

[This piece was commissioned for Barbara Ann Levy's WPB/NYC and Anything Else blog and was posted there on February 19, 2010.]

What if...?

What if I had not read an article, a couple of reviews and some promo about Tino Sehgal’s Guggenheim exhibition? What if I hadn’t spent a short time, in the winter of 2008, with a more modest Sehgal situation staged inside the Marian Goodman Gallery?

What if I didn't know that a little kid would greet me near the bottom of the Guggenheim's ramp, introduce Sehgal's conceptual--but curiously theatrical--interactive piece, This Progress, and sweetly query if it would be okay to ask me a question?

What if I didn't already know that question would be "What is progress?" and hadn't carefully planned my response?

["Who's asking?" I would say. "Progress can be defined by who benefits as well as who suffers, whose ox is being gored?" Or words to that effect. I live in the East Village and had the evils of gentrification on my mind.]

What if...?

But I get ahead of myself.

Arriving at the museum on a cold, windy Wednesday afternoon, I was chagrined to discover it bustling with visitors. The prospect of Frank Lloyd Wright's spiraling ramps stripped of all visual art--like the sun-bleached ribcage of a flayed body--had sounded like a rare, not-to-be-missed experience.

I imagined myself with perhaps just a few others, viewing Sehgal's rotunda floor show--Kiss, a gorgeous, part-naturalistic/part-dancey duet--before climbing the ramps, guided by a series of people with whom I'd converse about progress. Holland Cotter, reviewing for The New York Times, had found value in this, and since I find great value in Holland Cotter on a regular basis, I felt fairly confident.

I eyed Kiss for a while. But the sight--and sound!--of people strewn along the ramps, from bottom to top, knocked me back on my heels. I parked my outerwear with the coatchecker, made a preliminary pit stop since New York magazine's Jerry Saltz had noted that he'd spent three note-scribbling hours with This Progress--and then headed for the base of the ramp.

I started up alone, keeping watch for the approach of an earnest kidling. Now and again, I gazed back at Kiss where the languid duet of lovers had now turned into a perfectly-synced double-duet. Then I saw him--or them, a small knot of little boys. I thought, at first, they were part of a school group. But no. There he was--my first guide. Peeling away from his mates, he sidled up to me and introduced himself and told me the name of Sehgal's work.

Then, the polite question: "What is progress?"

I launched into my prepared answer--and my prepared child-friendly clarification of my prepared answer. I rattled on about how neighborhoods change, not always for the better. We'd lost our wonderful shoe repair guy, any number of favorite restaurants. He led me along, saying just enough to show that he got what I was talking about before a friendly young man came up to us. I'd say he was probably in his twenties, but I'm as bad at guessing ages as I am at retaining names, especially since, unlike Saltz, I was too distracted--though self-conscious, too--to even glance at the notebook and pen clutched in my left hand.

Guide #1 told Guide #2 what we'd been talking about--well, a child's Cliff Notes version of it, good enough--and left us to continue the climb. Guide #2 and I clicked right away--especially when we realized a Lower East Side/East Village connection. Our conversation was filled with geographical, historical and artistic keystones.

Same with Guide #3--older by perhaps a couple of decades--who greeted us at some point along the way. Having kept up eye contact with the cheerful #2 for quite a bit, I had no idea what level we'd reached.

#3 seemed to know exactly what we'd been discussing. (Was there an open cellphone or walkie talkie connection involved?) He picked up the gentrification issue right away, and pretty soon, he was all "Tompkins Square Park" and "Giuliani." With him, I felt more emboldened to probe: "So, you live in Brooklyn now--like a lot of my friends and colleagues in the arts. What do you do?"

We embarked on a pleasant chat, even though climbing and spiraling while keeping a fairly steady eye on my interlocutor/guide made me feel dizzy. But the sudden approach of Guide #4--an amiable, elderly gent--must have distracted me long enough for #3 to vanish. I was stunned--and a bit disappointed.

"Hey," I said to #4. "I've lost my friend!" Funny how real that felt, how I had totally fallen into Sehgal's artificial, art-ificial, art-official situation.

What is progress? Disappearance of the familiar, of what you value most and hold dear.

The realization of a sudden loss--or was it just dizzyiness from the climb?--left me breathless for a moment.

Happily, Guide #4 was understanding--and charming. He let me sputter. Then, with warmth, he told a story about a creek he used to visit when he was a child in Indiana. In recent years, he returned there, only to find the land developed, the creek covered over. I felt sorrow for him and told him so.

We spoke a bit longer before he indicated that This Progress had ended, shook my hand and left me on a level with Paris and the Avant-garde: Modern Masters from the Guggenheim Collection. I sat in that gallery long enough to make a few notes but realized I had absolutely no interest in looking around.

Walking back down the ramps, I glanced at people as they climbed alone or with an actual friend; others obviously with This Progress guides. I was curious about the conversations.

At ground level, I retrieved my winter gear and dressed while catching up with Kiss--a little, intimate dance filled with delicious little intimacies set against the stark, towering glory of Wright's rotunda--a still-beating heart at the center of that sun-bleached ribcage.

On the way out, I was forced to exit by carefully winding my way through the narrow gift shop, and that tapped into my emerging unease. It felt wrong, somehow. I realized that I was not only still out of sorts from the swift, spiral climb but also by a growing sense that I'd been hemmed in not only by the environment but also by the very nature of the conversations.

Surely there are other ways to approach this notion of progress, but I--it was my doing--had set course in a particularly negative, if familiar and comfortable, direction. In the midst of it all, I'd realized that, but had felt unable to break in with other valid ideas of what progress could be.

I had established the entrance to a tube--a spiraling tube--through which my succession of guides and I had
faithfully climbed, cut off from other possibilities.

It felt wrong, somehow. And it felt like a significant lesson.

This Progress, then, is more than a walk, with conversations, as a piece of ephemeral, conceptual art. It is, potentially, a work of tranformation. For me, that qualifies Sehgal's achievement as the highest art.



Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Sehgal's Guggenheim: the complexity of progress

In the Naked Museum: Talking, Thinking, Encountering
by Holland Cotter, The New York Times, February 1, 2010

And here's my short commentary on a Tino Sehgal piece I witnessed in 2008 at the Marion Goodman Gallery. I'm hoping to get up to the Guggenheim soon.

For details on the Guggenheim exhibition, click here.

Sunday, May 25, 2008

She dances me with science

New York's brand new World Science Festival (May 29-June 1) is way, way cool! Visit the WSF Web site for its extensive schedule of programming for adults and families. And, yes, there's a dance tie-in!

Dance genius Bill T. Jones joins a panel of various artists and neuroscientists entitled Illuminating Genius: Unlocking Creativity (Thursday, May 29, 8pm at Skirball Center for the Performing Arts, NYU), moderated by John Hockenberry, co-host of WNYC's new morning show, The Takeaway. And what's more, Karole Armitage weighs in with a dance work inspired by Brian Greene's bestseller, The Elegant Universe at Works & Process at the Guggenheim Museum, Friday, May 30 and Saturday, May 31 (both at 7:30pm).

Ticket prices for these and many more fascinating events can be found--although buried deep--on the WSF Web site. Have a little patience: the site can be slow. It all looks very good and maybe next year, with some advance warning, I'll be able to schedule my dance-going to avoid missing this terrific stuff. (Oh, did you know I was a science nerd, too?)

Copyright notice

Copyright © 2007-2023 Eva Yaa Asantewaa
All Rights Reserved

Popular Posts

Labels