Sculpture Center Reaction

          An artist has to make many decisions when it comes to the installation of his/her work. Some of the things that the artist checks is the space. For this writing I will provide my point of view about whether or not an art needs to be in a specific place to give an expected impression. This time I am sharing three works from The Sculpture Center in Queens.  

          First, I found the “Graphite Piece” by Paul Mogensen, which I consider is in a good place. The colors and texture look good in the place where it is. When I went in to the place where it was, I found exactly what I was expecting; a wall with something on it. If this work is moved from where it is, like in a bigger space, it would lose the intensity that the color transmits. I saw paintings near the place, and I think that they should not be there or there should be more of them, in order to get a place full of works or in order to catch the attention of only the “Graphite Piece”.

          Second, it is a movie (film) from Museum of Modern Art-New York. I like the place where it is. It looks like a mini theater. I think that a little bit of light would not be so bad. I was scared of getting in there because I did not know what was in there. It is too dark but the space it is good enough for the screen that shows the film. The work was not what I expected; in other words, I did not expect that a movie would be there. It would be better if the work is moved to a space where the entrance is bigger. It is sad to see that there is not any other work close to it.

          Last, an untitled work by Kunstmuseum-st. Gallen. This work was the one that I found it was in the appropriate space needed to give the impression that the artist is looking for. It is in a place surrounded by other works related to it and the space where it is is perfect. It looks like a construction side. It would not be a good idea to move it from where it is.

          It is important to know what the work would look like in certain places. It is a difficult decision but once made it, it will worth.


Paul Mogensen-New York
"Graphite Piece"
1969 (2012)

Museum of Modern Art-New York
"Movie"
1970

Kunsmuseum-st. Gallen
"Untitled"
1970 (2002)

“Design in Our Lives”

       There are many things around us that are high functional and also things that are low functional in our lives. In our visit to The Museum of Modern Art, I observed many interesting works; from old fashioned furniture, to future “possible useful” things. As my assignment requires, I will provide two examples of “High functionality” objects and “Low functionality” objects.

First, I will start by talking about two objects which I think do not have high functionality. Hannah Hoch German, 1889-1978. Indian Dancer: from an ethnographic museum 1930. It is a painting. I think this design would not be useful. This painting is only useful to decorate a wall. It does not do anything that could really change a thing. Because of that I qualify this painting as “Low functionality”. Another design that I qualify as “Low functionality” is a body 3 portable storage system 1969 by Joe Colombo (Italian, 1930-1971). It is an uncomfortable portable item. It may carry light items while shopping but not the heavy one. Because of the short use that this portable item does, for me, is a “Low functionality.

On the other hand, there were many useful items. The “XXXX sofa” by Yuya Ushida (Japanese b. 1976 Polyamide), is design that I find “High functionality”. This is an item that can be use by one or more people and occupies less space when is closed. Becomes from a chair to a sofa and it has also a great supports. It can be used in many places, such as: park, living room, beach (because if it gets wet it does not matter), party, etc. Another great design! Which I think it does not have the attention deserved, is “Water cone water collection device” by Stephan Augustine (German, b. 1967). This device is an important and I would call it “The wonder” because of its great functionality, which is to produce water with the radiation of the sunlight. I f a group of people have a trip to the countryside or somewhere far away, it is great to have one of this thing in case that the group finish all the liquid they were carrying. With this cone water would be always there (as soon as the sun is out).

  In conclusion, I liked a lot the exhibition. It was interesting seeing things that I did not reach to use; however, there were things that I did not find interesting nor useful.

Hannah Hoch
"Indian Dancer: From an ethmographic museum"
1889-1978

Yuya Ushida
"xxxx Sofa"
b. 1970

Stephan Agustin
"Water cone water colection device"
b. 1967

“Narrative Digital Collage"

"Art:21 Power Reaction"

Cai-Guo Qiang does a powerful work. His work is risky but with a posibility to obtain it as he expect it. The power on his work is composed by explosives, paper, and stones. It is the first time I see anything like that, and I think that is why I see his work with power. Somehow he transmit a message and his inspiration through his works. It may look easy but I am sure that it's not.

"Illustrate a story"

When there is true love, no even the years will make those two people to forget that big feeling.

MoMA PS1: The Good, the Bad, and the Misunderstood

“Everyone to their own taste” that is how I see art. Art is full of variety and because of that is very difficult to not fall in love with an artist’s work.  On a short visit to the museum Moma PS1, I found one curious art work and the rest nothing to say.

          The art work I liked the most at this museum was (Golden Ghost “The Belongs to Ghost”) by Surasi Kusolwong. This is a great job to point at our economical situation, beside that is fun. I like his authenticity, I mean “To take jewelry and put them in a place where (while searching for them) you have fun” According to the information posted, there are 4.5 tools of thread waste pure gold necklaces with golden ghost motif mirror wooden. I guess that the main idea for this work from Kusolwong is to be happy face even though if you are going through a hard time. This work reminds me of my childhood when I used to play in the playground with the balls in there.

          On the other hand, I found three art works that I did not understand pretty much and those arts are: “Serve up” 2009 (Collection Hudgins Family, New York), Untitled 1999 (Courtesy the Artist), and “Fist and Fury” 2007 (Collection Jonathan and Cathy Miller). Those 3 art works are confusing to me because they all belong to different artists and show a dish with spaghetti. What I don’t understand is why they concentrated their art in food. To add more, because I don’t understand those works I considered that I don’t like them, even though, I like to investigate something deeper, but this is not the case. They did not take my attention in a “Wow”. I think that the spaghettis are interesting but at the same time it’s what really killed my appreciation about them.

          All in all, for a work to be a good art, does not necessarily should have its message clear but it must have something that make you think “Hey! This is great!” For me a art work that does not call my attention, it’s discarded.

Art and Identity: The Museum of Modern Art

Art is the only thing that can make you blind if you don’t understand what a work from an artist is about. It takes time and attention to figure out what the message is from the artist. As we know, there are many ways to do art. I would like to share with you two form of arts and what their messages are.

          Sometimes an art transmits the message you are looking for and sometimes we never get it. In my case, I had a hard time finding the meaning of the sculpture “Lady Rosa of Luxembourg” by the artist Sanja Ivekovic. This sculpture has captured so much attention and not precisely because is a copy of Gelle Fra with some arrangements, but also because it’s historical message. “Lady Rosa of Luxembourg” was dedicated to a Marxist philosopher, economist and also activist, Rosa Luxemburg. She was killed because of her radical political ideas by 1919. She was a revolutionary. The idea of the artist was to bring up women rights or power, and somehow she did.

          Do you remember day saying “I am as calm as a picture”? Well, pictures can transport you through the time. It is exactly what Cindy Sherman did with her exhibition at momma’s museum. Through many pictures, Sherman describes different women personalities and situations. She created different sections to show her works, such as: sex, fashion, historical faces, and others. No matter what, there are always at least! One of her picture that will catch your attention or probably, with which you will feel identified. I couldn’t choose my favorite section, but I would say that is the fashion section. Why? Because I liked the way that she pointed out that make up and clothes make of you a different woman in the physical aspect but not the internal. Sherman’s works in this exposition are amazing.

          All in all, art is a communicative medium. The simplest art can bring you a big lesson. In this occasion a sculpture let us know more about historical information and pictures can be more powerful than a mirror. Art is unpredictable in its own.

Sanja Ivekovic "Lady Rosa of luxembourg" 2001

Cindy Sherman "Cindy Sherman" 2010