This is not a very good show. Surprising as one would think the roots of Modernism would be seen here. The Modern Museum of Art comes from Europe and the American rivulets have been largely passed over.
Much better examples are in Kansas City and St Louis and other Museums across the country. I suppose NY museums were cool to the work and it was easier to give locally, I'm not sure.
One thing is that the future of American art was not so much influenced by these works. The Modern Museum's work is so lack luster it seems to keep this idea in check.
I have had the opposite idea coming across the US visiting Museums I see really great examples everywhere.
Some can be seen here.
The lineage in American art of these earlier modern artists do have some history but it is not told here at the Modern.
Stuart Davis has had a larger influence but they have nothing of his late work up.
Hartley which this is a great example has not been influential, as figuration which he has influenced has not been a large part of Modernism. O'Keeffe's influence seems mainly to lesser art.
Dove is a favorite of a lot of abstract painters.
I personally think these artists are a place to go back and look around.
They still had an idea of nature which is good in relation to our new idea of the Earth.
Hopper is very illustrative and why alot of this art and period is seen in a dim light, though there are tropes in his work about nature and alienation of the Modern which can be useful. Birchfield though can be underrated. He is a surprise.
 |
| Hopper |
 |
| Dove |
 |
| O'Keeffe |
 |
| Stuart Davis |
 |
| Edwin Dickinsen |
 |
| Hartley |
 |
| Sheeler |
No comments:
Post a Comment