  Texorama Member Username: Texorama Post Number: 105 Registered: 12-2006 |
He's generally complimentary about the displays, and he raves about MOCAD's current doings. There are some inaccuracies, and a gratuitous slam at the emptiness of the nearby streets. He feels an opportunity was missed with the bland exterior redesign, and IMO he has a point here. He also complains that the interior is still hard to get around, but most museums are that way until you get familiar with them; the thing about the old DIA was that you never really learned your way around. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11 /23/arts/design/23detr.html | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 1485 Registered: 12-2004 |
Interesting read. Thanks Texorama. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2608 Registered: 12-2004 |
quote: What inaccuracies were there? | ||
Alan55 Member Username: Alan55 Post Number: 772 Registered: 09-2005 |
"The Detroit Institute of Arts, one of the country’s small but classic encyclopedic museums, could be on an open prairie rather than in the center of a city, so faint is the urban buzz around it. Little commercial energy warms the nearby streets. Residential neighborhoods are at a distance. Traffic on the broad thoroughfare running past the museum is sparse..." Above are his first four sentences. Talk about hackneyed writing. Heard it all before - Detroit, worn, tired old city. Yeah, yeah. Sorry, but this guy thinks he is F. Scott Fitzgerald, writing the Great American Novel instead of an art review. Maybe he starts his reviews of the Metropolitan Museum of Art or the Guggenheim with, "New York - litter-strewn streets filled with arrogant, loud-mouthed blowhards, while taxi horns are blaring at anyone and everyone." Stick to art, buddy, rather than stereotypical, cliched, pulp urban philosophy. | ||
Patrick Member Username: Patrick Post Number: 5173 Registered: 10-2003 |
What did you expect? The writer is from New Yawk and has the typical "the world revolves around us" mentality. | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 1004 Registered: 11-2004 |
Here's the entire article so everyone doesn't have to register. Detroit’s Latest Model: A Retooled Museum By HOLLAND COTTER DETROIT — The Detroit Institute of Arts, one of the country’s small but classic encyclopedic museums, could be on an open prairie rather than in the center of a city, so faint is the urban buzz around it. Little commercial energy warms the nearby streets. Residential neighborhoods are at a distance. Traffic on the broad thoroughfare running past the museum is sparse, even as this institution, closed for the last six months, celebrates a reopening on Nov. 23 that is being advertised as a resurrection. There is potentially much to feel good about. A master plan designed by the architect Michael Graves, reorganizing the museum’s interior and expanding its gallery space by 31,000 square feet, has been completed. The permanent collection, with its gems of Flemish, Dutch and American art, has been freshly and inventively reinstalled. A new gallery of African-American art, one of the few of its kind, is in place. But there is also much to ponder. For years before the shutdown, the financially strained museum was operating at reduced strength, with curtailed hours and closed galleries. The rethought collection is an experiment in progress. Some aspects of it would have given the museum’s Victorian founders a healthy shock; other aspects would have pleased them too well. In short, this story of a vulnerable institution in a spirited but depressed town is one of modest triumphs mingled with failures. And it is a very American story, about the shameful way we treat our ailing cities; about what we value in culture; about how the inescapable politics of race and class shape the institutions that write our history; about how art, that glittering bauble, might have some use after all. The Detroit Institute of Arts, like most older American art museums, was the product of a hard-nosed, hardscrabble nation that found itself, at the end of the 19th century, on top of the world. A country that had once defined itself as the un-Europe more and more aspired to be a New Europe, at least in terms of high culture. Increasingly, its republican gentry imported art from abroad and built museums that looked like temples and banks to hold those treasures. The Detroit Institute’s Beaux-Arts home, designed by Paul Philippe Cret and finished in 1927, is a textbook example of the type. The 1920s was a peak moment for Detroit. The auto industry was booming; the museum flourished under the leadership of its globally minded German-born director, William Valentiner. Fabulous European paintings arrived: “St. Jerome in His Study,” attributed to Jan van Eyck; “The Wedding Dance” by Pieter Bruegel the Elder; a Giovanni Bellini “Madonna and Child”; Jacob van Ruisdael’s “Jewish Cemetery.” So did examples of Asian, African, pre-Columbian and Islamic art. Even during the Depression Mr. Valentiner made spectacular acquisitions. In 1931 he commissioned Diego Rivera to paint his now famous, and at the time infamous, “Detroit Industry” mural cycle in one of the museum’s indoor courtyards. One of the great surviving landmarks of populist, leftist art, it was paid for by Mr. Valentiner’s friend and angel Edsel B. Ford. More art required more room. A new wing was built in 1966, another in 1971. They added space but complicated an already confusing floor plan, making the museum nearly impossible to navigate. The $158 million Graves master plan was intended to bring some logic to the existing traffic patterns, though as far as I could tell, it doesn’t do the job. The layout just feels confusing in a different way. As for the revised exterior, I feel that what was needed for a city with a reputation for dust and vacancy was a big, glamorous statement; an architectural event; a thrill. The Graves design is staid, cautious, almost self-effacing. Beginning in the 1960s Detroit began a profound economic slide. Industry faltered; jobs dried up. Racism was a social explosion waiting to happen, and it did. Whites high-tailed it to the suburbs, taking business and services with them. Blacks were left with a desolate urban shell in which the museum sat marooned. As a monument to aspirations of a white upper class of an earlier age, the museum understandably held little interest for its disenfranchised neighbors. At the same time, the audience it had catered to began to stay away. Caught in a no-win squeeze, the institution appeared to wither as curators left, galleries closed, and public hours shrank. The present reopening, pushed through by Graham W. J. Beal, director since 1999, clearly represents the start of a strenuous effort to appeal to new audiences while retaining the loyalty of old ones, to create a street-level people’s museum from a lofty mountain of elite art. The signature masterpieces are in place. Some are prominent: the scarlet sun in Frederic Church’s “Cotopaxi” is visible several galleries away. Most are integrated into thematic displays. Interpretive statements abound: explanatory labels, illustrative videos and various digital aids. Their presence can be annoying when the line between accessibility and dumbing down becomes thin. At the same time, this concept-intensive approach can do a lot to vivify difficult or second-tier material. By turning the museum’s overabundant supply of French Rococo painting and furnishings into an aristocratic lifestyle display, the curators make shrewd contextual sense of the material. They do so again by calling a gallery of Baroque religious painting “Art as Theater.” That theme is both true to the art and makes it intriguing rather than dismissible for a secular age. It also demonstrates how canny a dramatist Artemisia Gentileschi was in her picture of Judith and her maidservant coolly cleaning up after dispatching Holofernes. Of real interest is what the reinstallation tells us about the museum’s recent collecting patterns. Its continuing acquisition of African art can surely be taken as a sign of its efforts to engage with the city. In addition, the reinstalled African galleries — overseen by Nii O. Quarcoopome, a curator born in Nigeria — are twice their former size and prominently placed near the most trafficked street entrance. The new galleries of African-American art suggest the same commitment. You can argue — many people do — that such work should properly be integrated into the larger art historical picture, and in small but telling ways the museum does this. In an excellent special exhibition of works on paper from the collection, all 22 gouache paintings in Jacob Lawrence’s “John Brown” series hang near a two-sided Michelangelo sketch for the Sistine Chapel, uniting two different but equally powerful versions of the heroic. In the context of a city — and a country — still crippled by old thinking about race, the presence of the African-American galleries constitutes an important gesture in two ways. It acknowledges the reality of alternative histories of American art. And by including the work of at least one Detroit artist, Tyree Guyton, it emphasizes afresh the museum’s identity as a local institution. Mr. Guyton is a civic treasure as an artist and as the creative force behind the extraordinary “Heidelberg Project,” a grand communal act of urban reclamation that has, for 20 years, been turning blocks of condemned houses in a black neighborhood into giant sculptural assemblages incorporating cast-off materials and found objects. His work was one of the few examples of contemporary Detroit art that I was able to see on a too-brief visit, though there are many artists in the city, and their numbers are growing. Some are moving into cheap studio spaces not far from the Detroit Institute of Arts, though the focus of their cultural reference may well be the modest but adventurous Museum of Contemporary Art Detroit, four blocks south on Woodward Avenue. Mocad, as everyone calls it, opened just over a year ago in a one-story former car dealership. Its current show, “Words Fail Me,” organized by the New York artist and curator Matthew Higgs, explores language as a visual-art medium that is also directly linked to poetry. Most of the 16 artists included are familiar names in New York. I wondered if they would look out of place in Detroit, but they don’t. Carl Pope’s fierce, funny posters — part hip-hop, part sermon — are exactly right for this city. So are Sam Durant’s placards for an existential protest march and Anne-lise Coste’s graffitilike drawings. Siobhan Liddell’s near-invisible words, “Weakness as Strength,” might make an ideal logo for the beleaguered but valorous Detroit Institute up the road. And the words in a big neon sign by the British artist Martin Creed, now on the exterior of the contemporary-art museum, should be emblazoned high in the city sky. “Everything Is Going to Be Alright,” the sign says, and its illuminated message shines brightest at night. The reopened galleries are on permanent view at the Detroit Institute of Arts, 5200 Woodward Avenue, (313) 833-7900, dia.org; “Words Fail Me” continues through Jan. 20 at the Museum of Contemporary Art Detroit, 4454 Woodward Avenue, (313) 832-6622, mocadetroit.org. | ||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 3087 Registered: 11-2003 |
Obviously the writer had little problem finding the DIA. | ||
Xd_brklyn Member Username: Xd_brklyn Post Number: 344 Registered: 10-2003 |
Holland Cotter is the one art critic on the Times who I can listen to. quote: These two sentences say a lot more than your usual art review. As for, quote: Well, the addition is a case where you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. If the DIA went for the thrill, a critic could easily knock it for not respecting the original building. Plus, there have been architectural events that have failed miserably so any thrill-chasing would be a gamble and the DIA was already going on a limb with its budget on the renovation as it was. Also architectural events often occur at the expense of interior space. Bilboa may be genius on the outside but the interior of that same building could never host a collection of art like the DIA's respectfully. Glad he was able to visit MOCAD and he did say his stay was "too-brief". It was easily one of the better articles the NY Times has put out recently. BTW, are the Early Italian Renaissance galleries still intact or have they been put into a "thematic display"? | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 280 Registered: 07-2007 |
One criticism is that it makes it sound like the DIA has been floundering until this grand reopening. I haven't had that feel for a number of years, especially since Beal took over as Director. I've been impressed by the effort the museum has been making for several years. Also, it doesn't sound like they bothered to get west of Woodward. The Wayne State area isn't Manhattan but it's hardly desolate. | ||
Spaceboykelly Member Username: Spaceboykelly Post Number: 262 Registered: 04-2005 |
I have to disagree with the author's introduction, "The Detroit Institute of Arts, one of the country’s small but classic encyclopedic museums, could be on an open prairie rather than in the center of a city, so faint is the urban buzz around it." Obviously, Cotter is trying to paint a picture, no pun intended, with this opening statement but it is mostly unfounded. The DIA is not one of the country's many small art museums, it is one of the largest encyclopedic exams in the United States. I do not have the statistics with me to verify that but I do know it is within the top 5 or top 10. Cotter goes on to mention the faintness of the "urban buzz" around the DIA which I also take issue with. If the author is comparing Midtown Detroit only to Chicago's Michigan Ave and NYC's 5th Ave (where many museums are found in those cities) then it makes sense. However, compared with the rest of the city, southeast Michigan, and other midwestern cities, Midtown Detroit is relatively active and has shops, cafes, bars, and so on all within walking distance. You could also walk to the DAM, CPOP, the science museums, the DHM, the Charles Wright, or MOCAD in minutes. I believe that Holland Cotter's too-short visit may have been on off-peak hours which is an issue since Midtown's population quadruples during business hours. In any event, I completely agree with Cotter's critique of the new design. Cotter argues, "As for the revised exterior, I feel that what was needed for a city with a reputation for dust and vacancy was a big, glamorous statement; an architectural event; a thrill." I have to say that from certain angles the DIA's addition is repulsive looking. I am very happy they have added space and renovated but the basic additions were made in an art style that is no longer relevant and with a marble that IMO is overpriced... and downright ugly in juxtaposition with the original building/sorroundings. The article is fine otherwise but I wonder why the grand reopening party and probably the most interesting thing that the "New DIA" is doing: staying open for 36 straight hours with DJs, drinks, and food is not mentioned. I think the author is wrong in stating that the "buzz" is lacking. Detroit has been jonesing for its art museum for four years. Students, hipsters, families, and members of the arts community are all excited that the day is finally upon us... we can fully enjoy our amazing collection again. (Message edited by spaceboykelly on November 23, 2007) | ||
Xd_brklyn Member Username: Xd_brklyn Post Number: 345 Registered: 10-2003 |
Well, if you live in NYC, the foot and car traffic around the DIA is sparse and compared to NYC there is ample space all around, no question. However, these are preciously the reasons I enjoy visiting. You get an urban environment plus plenty of elbow room. But, whatever, in many cases, pictures speak louder than words, and having just picked up today's NY Times, there's large picture of the DIA's Great Hall that occupies almost all the front page space on the NY Time's Weekend Arts section. Impressive. | ||
Quinn Member Username: Quinn Post Number: 1544 Registered: 01-2005 |
Spaceboy I agree with everything you wrote. The exterior is pretty aweful...where the old addition's black/blank facade gave due credit to the original renaissance masterpiece, this one stands in stark contrast with its cool colors (the original section is warm limestone) and cold, bright marble, and generally sucks a@#. As for the reference to it being on an open prairie...there are few better examples of great civic architecture and urban planning in this country than the DIA and its juxtaposition with the Library, Detroit Historical Museum, Wayne State and the central axis-road of the region, Woodward. On a prairie? Hardly. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 5790 Registered: 08-2004 |
Spaceboykelly, you brought up the 2 points that really grated me as well... 1) "small but encyclopedic museums"... what a stupid contradicting statement... I guess when you're used to the largest single art museum in the country (MMOA) then all other art museums seem "small". But that is a snobish condescending slap at all other museums outside of New York. The terms "small" and "encyclopedic" are mutually exclusive... one cannot have a encyclopedic collection in a small museum. How pretentious!! 2) is the "open prairie" comment. Not all cities had enough forethought to actually have a "museum district". Many, such as NYC squeezed their museums either onto public land (in NYC case encroaching onto Central Park), or onto a regular commercial business street (51st for MOMA). The prospect of having a green belt around the DIA and the DPL across the street must be foreign to New Yorker eyes, where "shoe horning" buildings to available sites is the norm, rather than the exception. What a bunch of elitist drivel... P.S. There are only 3 Pieter Brueghel the Elder paintings outside of Europe... and NYC does NOT have one of the 3!  | ||
Mind_field Member Username: Mind_field Post Number: 822 Registered: 10-2003 |
I can't ENTIRELY blame him for writing about the lack of urban intensity in midtown. If you visit parts of downtown and midtown during the "wrong" times, they are desolate. If you visit during the "right" times, they are teeming. And coming from the urban marvel that is NYC, it is hard to get a proper perspective on urban America. NYC is a world unto itself. | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 1005 Registered: 11-2004 |
I can understand the comments about the lack "urban buzz". However to call the 5th largest art museum in the county "small" is just mind bogglingly ignorant and elitist. I could do without all the social commentary as well. Overall though I'm glad the the new DIA was well received that's the most important thing. It's also great to see MOCAD get some very nice publicity | ||
Xd_brklyn Member Username: Xd_brklyn Post Number: 346 Registered: 10-2003 |
"There are only 3 Pieter Brueghel the Elder paintings outside of Europe... and NYC does NOT have one of the 3!" Correction, there's Brueghel's "The Harvesters" As for the addition, the new marble on the addition is from the same marble quarry as the original building. It will wear better with age. Finally, yes, there are some NYC prejudiced slights in the article, but, I don't know...whatever. You met the same thing with respect to how Manhattan looked at Brooklyn for years. Comments like that always left me non-plussed because it made them look worse than what they were dismissing. In any case, the slights in the article are small compared to over all take by the writer who found the DIA and MOCAD both interesting and spirited. A plus in my book. | ||
Clermont Member Username: Clermont Post Number: 14 Registered: 09-2007 |
How many art museums or in or even near residential neighborhoods? i recently visited the barnes foundation in suburban philadelphia (which actually is a smallish but amazing museum) and they've had a lot of problems being located in a residential area and currently are embroiled in litigation as the trustees want to move it to a sort of museum mile strip in philly proper against the terms of the trust set by dr. barnes. | ||
Texorama Member Username: Texorama Post Number: 106 Registered: 12-2006 |
The inaccuracies I had in mind have pretty much been covered here . . . the fact that there has been quite a space between the museum's crisis and the renovation, no one is advertising the renovation as a "resurrection," such a strong statement about the surroundings should not have been made without investigating the Wayne State area, and the DIA is by no stretch a small museum . . . and on top of that, the Heidelberg Project is not really communal, and it has not been "reclaiming blocks" for 20 years, it's pretty much on one block, and it's not growing in the way that sentence would suggest. I did basically think it was a good article nevertheless. I agree with him about the exterior. Yes, there is a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you -don't aspect to dramatic expansions, but other architects have managed to do visually conservative things (look at the Nelson-Atkins museum in Kansas City) without being so blocky. The writer has some interesting thoughts about the African galleries, and he makes it sound as though there's sort of a common approach between the African and the European galleries, which could be very compelling. I'm out of town for the holidays but looking forward to seeing the whole deal for myself! | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 5791 Registered: 08-2004 |
OK Xd_brklyn, my book on Brueghel doesn't list that one (it's part of a set that got broken up). Hey Eric, can you cut/paste and send this to the NY Times editorial (I don't have a subscription)? ____________________________ Dear New York Times, I read with amusement Holland Cotter's rather amusing article about the renovated Detroit Institute of Arts expansion. Mr. Cotter started his article with an oxymoron in labeling the Detroit museum as "small encyclopedic"... perhaps he didn't realize that those 2 words are mutually exclusive. I guess with only the massive MMOA to compare to, the DIA (5th largest art museum in the country) is not as labyrinthine as its' NYC cousin. But with over 100 galleries, calling it "small" seems hardly fitting. And labeling its' surroundings as urban prairie does a disservice to the landscaped grounds of Detroit's museum district. Detroit had the foresight to plan an area along its' main thoroughfare for a cultural center that included the city's main art museum, historical museum, main public library, and later additions such as the Children's Museum, Science Center, and African American Museum. In Detroit, museums weren't an afterthought haphazardly placed around the city. In Detroit a section of the city was purposefully set aside away from urban commercial congestion. This is similar to how some of the great cities of Europe planned their museum districts (the island museums of Berlin, and the urban museums around the Glyptothek of Munich come to mind). In Detroit, the landscaped grounds around our museums (urban prairies if you wish) allow us have space for future growth, not requiring the destruction of a neighboring office tower or take land from a public park. And by calling Detroit's Diego Rivera mural cycle "populist leftist art", it shows a continuing condescending attitude that 70 years ago led to Rockefeller Centers greatest loss, the Rivera murals of the RCA Building... they too were disparaged as "populist leftist art" and destroyed. At least Detroit's Edsel Ford back then saw the treasure for what it was, and had the foresight to preserve (what was to become America's greatest early 20th century mural) against public outcry. Maybe, after all, Detroit isn't as provincial as some New York art critics would make you believe. G. Istok Detroit _____________________________ | ||
Scruffy Member Username: Scruffy Post Number: 23 Registered: 04-2007 |
In my experience, people from NY tend to "get" Detroit as long as they're properly oriented to the City's history. I see hints of that in this piece, and we generally speaking can't fault the guy for calling our eight lane Main Street out front as he sees it. That said, he clearly was relying a bit more on apparently pre-conceived notions of Detroit than he could have possibly benn if he'd taken a spin or two around the block. IMO, if you want to see a real ravaging of Midtown and the DIA, just wait until the critic for the Chicago Tribune shows up. Compared to even the most jaundiced New Yorker, your average Chicagoan always has a bigger 'tude about the D. | ||
Xd_brklyn Member Username: Xd_brklyn Post Number: 347 Registered: 10-2003 |
Hey Clermont, a belated welcome to the forum! Gistok, like that last sentence in your letter As a side note, the Rivera murals at the RCA Building were much more leftist than the DIA murals. Rivera was criticized by his supporters for not making the DIA murals more political. Impressed by Edsel's personality and by the Rouge Plant itself, his Communist sympathies were not brought to the front like they were in New York. The RCA murals had Lenin with his hand on a white sphere that radiated a strong light in all directions. They attempted to move it to MoMA but were unable to do so because it was painted into the plaster of the building. No doubt, it was a loss for the city. I like the drawing Rivera did afterwards that showed the Rockefeller Plaza Apollo wearing black fish-net stockings. Scruffy, good point. | ||
Parkguy Member Username: Parkguy Post Number: 155 Registered: 04-2007 |
I have always been surprised by the apparent respect that Edsel Ford and Diego Rivera had for each other. But, however critics want to label the murals, they are a consistent draw for the DIA, and I've seen plenty of film crews in the hall shooting them for one documentary or another. I think the world sees them as important. And, I've had more than one foreign guest marvel at the "richness" (their words) of the DIA collection. I thought the article took a pretty dismissive tone about the DIA, but I also noticed that a good quarter of the piece raved about MOCAD and the NY artists currently exhibiting there. Michael Graves is no slouch as an architect, either-- his work is top-level. And, if you happened to see the coverage of the opening last week, you'll notice that the main driving force behind the construction wasn't to change the presentation, but to correct mistakes and shortcuts in the infrastructure of the building that could lead to damage to the collection. The extensive changes ALLOWED the DIA to improve the layout and presentation of the art. All in all, they did a good job. And, all in all, all of the reviews of the DIA are good, even the NY Times article. I've also seen several blog mentions lately, too. Here's one: http://smartcommunities.typepa d.com/suzanne/2007/11/what-to- do-on-1.html | ||
Diggelicious Member Username: Diggelicious Post Number: 66 Registered: 08-2005 |
I have to agree with the writer of the article and what was previously stated, if you go to Midtown on a weekend, etc. or the "wrong time", the place feels deserted and empty. Lift up the Detroit beer goggles, while the city is great and gets a bad wrap often, don't get your panties in a bunch. | ||
Matt_the_deuce Member Username: Matt_the_deuce Post Number: 764 Registered: 10-2003 |
Hey Gistok, sorry I didn't hit you back in the other thread - hope you're doing well. The critic, while I agree with many of his points, and believe he had some good things to say, just comes across as a pompous ass most of the time. Backhanded compliments, veiled swipes - it's all rather funny, if it wasn't a little bit frustrating. Gistok - I believe you can have a smaller encyclopedic museum, as encyclopedic I think has more to do with variety across styles as it does with total pieces and level of quality. Some museums specialize and others just want a little bit of everything. Here's our very own Graham Beal talking about one of his former positions- "It wasn't until I worked as director at the Joslyn Art Museum in Omaha, Nebraska, a medium-sized encyclopedic art museum, and became involved with docent training that I began to get a glimpse of the enormous gap separating the general art museum-going public from the art." To have the writer call our museum small is just flat out wrong. I hope to check out our Ginormous museum soon. (Message edited by matt the Deuce on November 23, 2007) | ||
Frank_c Member Username: Frank_c Post Number: 1429 Registered: 10-2003 |
Typical DetYes responses......overly sensitive to the truth. It is a good article and is NOT overly critical of Detroit, in fact I think it will draw the curious art aficionados to our "small but classic encyclopedic museum". | ||
Alan55 Member Username: Alan55 Post Number: 773 Registered: 09-2005 |
Well, despite your sour response, you're entitled to your opinion, Frank, just like Cotter is entitled to write formulaic, irrelevant tripe. | ||
Leoqueen Member Username: Leoqueen Post Number: 1655 Registered: 07-2004 |
----"And by including the work of at least one Detroit artist, Tyree Guyton, it emphasizes afresh the museum's identity as a local institution"----;Just to clarify, there were many more than just one Detroit and Detroit-area artists' work on permanent display---several Gordon Newton works, Robert Sestok, G.Snowden, Beverly Fishman, Al Loving, Hughie Lee-Smith, Allie McGhee, Charles McGee, and a few more that I cant recall right now. In my memory there has never been this many Michigan artists on exhibit at any one time there, except for the temporary Michigan shows or the during the OMAP days.Overall I thought the article by Cotter was basically positive, and might stimulate investigation in the DIA. I was there today for a few hours but had to leave early....am going back tonight for the Artists Party. The crowds were massive, and the atmosphere was totally upbeat. I think the visitors will keep coming, even though the entry fee is now a fixed $8, not pay what you want. Might stimulate more memberships. | ||
Rugbyman Member Username: Rugbyman Post Number: 157 Registered: 06-2005 |
Just got back from my walk through. Amazing. Only barely made it through half of the exhibits before I had to leave. The African section was really very good. The new descriptions are very informative and accessible. I can see why the old guard would be upset about the "proletariat" wording, but I thought they were wonderful. One BIG disappointment- for all of the security walking around, no one seemed to notice the annoying 16 year old girl and her tubby friend walking around TOUCHING the paintings and snapping pictures doing it. Wow. They looked startled when I flipped at them. Other than that- beautiful. I'm certainly planning on getting a membership. | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 264 Registered: 03-2006 |
I went to the DIA twice last year, and had never been before. Over Christmas break I plan on taking my girlfriend there in the morning before grabbing lunch and going skating at CM. When I was there before with only their "best of" exhibit open, I was there for 3 hours. How much time do you guys think I should budget to view the full collection. Any suggestions? | ||
Subterranean Member Username: Subterranean Post Number: 2 Registered: 09-2007 |
I find it particularly shitty that even in the face of a great art collection and redesign that they must focus on what's outside its walls more than what's inside. Detroit Free Press should do a piece on the new MOMA eventually, but focus on the grit of Brooklyn, only occasionally mentioning anything about art. |
