Art News Roundup: Morisot and More Edition

My latest for The Federalist, a review of the major exhibition on French Impressionist Berthe Morisot (1841-1895) that just opened at the Barnes Foundation in Philadelphia, is now available for your perusal. Sincere thanks to my very patient editor, Joy Pullmann, and everyone at The Federalist, for allowing me to share some of my thoughts on the show itself, and more importantly on Morisot’s woefully underrated art. I think you’ll find that it’s a fairly comprehensive exhibition and, even if you don’t particularly like Impressionist art, it’s worth visiting to see Morisot’s significant gifts for composition, and her very interesting development as an artist who, by the end of her career, was breaking away from the conventionally saccharine aspects of the Impressionist movement. In my view, she became a better and better painter the further away she got from the influence of contemporaries such as Manet, Pissarro, and Renoir.

JulMan

Unfortunately, the show’s organizers don’t seem to be willing to allow Morisot to be judged on her own merits, but rather insist from the get-go – the title of the show is “Berthe Morisot: Woman Impressionist” – that her work must be examined through the lens of feminist and gender theory. The exhibition catalogue even opens with reference to a work by the Guerrilla Girls, darlings of the Contemporary Art world who are truly horrible, untalented, and overrated charlatans. Mentioning them in the same breath as Morisot is like comparing Miley Cyrus to Maria Callas.

My best advice is that you go enjoy Morisot’s art on your own terms. It doesn’t need to be wrapped in someone else’s insecurity blanket in order to be appreciated. The show is at the Barnes until mid-January; after that it travels to the Dallas Museum of Art, and will have its last stop at the Orsay in Paris.

And since my Federalist piece is a bit of a lengthy one, just a couple of brief headlines from elsewhere in the art world this week.

A Prado in Barcelona?

Former French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, who is now running for Mayor of Barcelona – yes, you read that correctly – has issued a rather interesting proposal: Spain’s legendary Prado Museum in Madrid should open satellite Prados in other cities, as institutions such as the Louvre and Tate have done, beginning with Barcelona. While an intriguing idea, it must be said that this notion would seem to betray a critical lack of understanding on the part of M. Valls, with respect to both current and long-standing political and cultural tensions between the two cities. In any case, Madrid would be far more likely to authorize a first Prado satellite in Seville, rather than Barcelona, just as it authorized the first high-speed rail link between Madrid and Seville, making Barcelona wait. (Old hatreds never really die in Spain.)

As to this rather unusual political candidacy issue, M. Valls, shown below against a backdrop of Barcelona’s famous sidewalk tiles, was born in Barcelona to a Catalan father and a Swiss mother. However he was raised in Paris, and is a French citizen, so make of that what you will. He is currently running to replace the current Mayor of Barcelona, the dreadful Ada Colau, a failed actress who has proven to be an international embarrassment to the city since her election. Barcelonans will go to the polls iat the end of May, unfortunately right about the time when I’ll be arriving in town for my summer holidays. Perhaps I’ll head to the seaside for a couple of days, first.

SPAIN-CATALONIA-POLITICS-VALLS

A Phoenix in Budapest

Speaking of restoration, after having been closed to the public since it was heavily damaged during World War II, the magnificent main hall of the Museum of Fine Arts in Budapest has finally been restored. It reopened to the public at Noon yesterday, following several years of work. The Romanesque Revival interior is covered in scenes from Hungarian history, but suffered so badly during the war that it was turned into a storage room, since experts at the time believed that it would be impossible to bring it back to its former glory. Fortunately for us, that theory has now been disproved, as you can see in this 2-minute video of the restoration work. Magnificent job.

bUDA

Advertisements

Art Agonies: Politics Over Preservation

At present we live in a climate in which lovers of great art must put up with the strangely tortured and often ill-informed opinions of others. From nonsensical tweets about the nature of art by celebrity astrophysicists incapable of dressing themselves properly, to lowest common denominator garbage from princes of the Church who have been inexplicably tasked with matters of culture, it’s enough to make this writer want to throw up his hands and just walk away from all of it. I would probably have much more fun simply interviewing and highlighting the work of creative friends and acquaintances – painters, cosplayers, musicians, chefs, writers, etc. It tires me to read about risky decisions being made about art for the sake of political popularity.

A perfect example of this may be found in a recent interview with Françoise Nyssen, France’s Minister of Culture, given on Thursday to Europe 1 Radio. Mme. Nyssen floated the idea of sending the most famous painting in the world, Leonardo’s “Mona Lisa”, out on tour in order to combat what the Minister calls “cultural segregation”. If any of my readers can explain how a work of art is “culturally segregated”, when it is on display to everyone in a public museum, by all means do your best in the comments section. As an aside, I shudder to think what the insurance premiums would be on moving and displaying such an important object, which for decades The Louvre has not even dared to attempt cleaning.

This is not the only half-baked idea to come from the government of France’s greatest aficionado of sheer cover foundation, President Emmanuel Macron. Another ill-conceived project is to send the Bayeux Tapestry, which commemorates the Norman Invasion of Britain and the ensuing Battle of Hastings, across the English Channel to be displayed in a British museum. Like the “Mona Lisa”, the Bayeux Tapestry is an incredibly fragile object, arguably the most famous of its type in the world, and has not left its home in France for many years. Many French historians, preservation specialists, and locals are appalled at the notion of even attempting to move the Tapestry off-site, let alone send it out of the country, but for political reasons Monsieur Maquillage seems determined to proceed with this idea.

Exhibitions which allow works of art to travel from one institution to another are not bad things in and of themselves. When handled properly, they can bring to new audiences objects which they might never be able to visit otherwise. Consideration of the state of preservation of such objects, particularly when of significant age, fragility, or difficulty in transport, must be given absolute priority: Michelangelo’s “David” is never going to leave Florence to go on tour, for example.

However, placing irrational, politically-motivated thinking ahead of issues such as preservation and integrity (and yes, Your Holiness, appropriateness) is morally reprehensible. It plays Russian roulette with the ability of future generations to see, appreciate, and learn from these objects, all for the sake of temporary political popularity. Those who engage in such games by putting at risk the cultural patrimony under their temporary care should be publicly criticized and called to account.

Harold

Four Years Of This: Tomorrow’s Anti-Trump Art Strike Will Miss The Target

Ever since the 2016 American Presidential election, the art press has grown more irrational than usual, which is saying something. The fear of a Trump Presidency, in tandem with a conservative-led Congress, has fired up the art world in a way not seen since the cultish swooning that greeted the first Obama inauguration eight years ago. A perfect example of this is the “Art Strike” taking place tomorrow during the Presidential Inauguration, an event which you would be forgiven for not even being aware of until now.

A summary of the reasoning behind this event is contained in an essay published yesterday in Apollo. The author, an art history professor at NYU, explains that the strike will be “in response to the feared imperilment of individual liberty and social equality that a Trump presidency might inaugurate.” He expresses the hope that this event may have legs well beyond just a single day, as the art world confronts Trump, et al., in the coming years.

The application of logic, a virtue little understood and rarely valued within the art world, requires that we ask two questions about this event. The first and perhaps most fundamental question is, are the organizers being a bit premature? Having such an extreme reaction to something which has not even happened yet is somewhat odd. It seems rather like going to the doctor because your toe hurts, and then insisting that he amputate your entire foot, before he has even taken an x-ray.

Yet the second, arguably more substantive question must be: who exactly is going to be hurt by this event?

Certainly an “art strike” will not hurt Mr. Trump, an appalling man of appalling taste who is not known for being a patron of the arts. Nor will it hurt Congress, which historically has shown little interest in or patience for the whingings of the art world. Nor is this event likely to have any impact on average American voters, whose rare dealings with the inherent attitude of condescension and relativism within the art world usually leave them unimpressed and unwilling to support it, morally or financially.

What is perhaps most curious about an exercise such as this, is that it may end up having the exact opposite effect of what its organizers intend. Beyond the noble values of the free expression of citizens and the unfettered creative process, the unspoken motivator here is that of money. Artists, museums, and public institutions are naturally worried that a new Republican administration will cut their funding, as has happened to them many times in the past in the shift from a leftist to a conservative government.  Yet if the art world is so concerned about Mr. Trump or Congress turning a giant, flaming eye from atop Barad-dûr in its direction, surely it could not make more certain of heightened fiscal scrutiny, than by going out of its way to insult, ridicule, and shriek at those who hold the purse strings.

In short, gentle reader, at least for this scrivener, it is going to be a long four years – or more.