Inherent Problems in "Single-thread" Exhibitions?

Neat topic. However, I disagree slightly. Were Van Gogh's "Night time" works just jumbled together or were they perhaps done in a chrono fashion with discussions of where VG was at the time he did the very works on exhibit.

I remember Wyeths single topic exhibit called the "Helga Chronicles" His works and study skectches were arranged in a fashion that covered the entire period that Wyeth was exhorciszing the subject of HElga. The show was fascinating (especially to artists who got to peer behind the curtain as to how Wyeth was going to execute these works)

There are facsimiles of Van Goghs letters to Theo that cover many of the subjects of the "Nightime studies" , like "The yellow room" or the "CAfe dwellers" (I believe thats the title). His ideas of the subject matter are enough to center a show on this subject .

Think of other single subject shows

Church's works surrounding "In the Heart of the ANdes"

Copley's Hudson River stuff

Hoppers works on "Loneliness of urban scenerey"

Okeefes "Boneyard"

Blakes wierdnesses

Klimpt studies of Art Nouveau personalities

Sargents war paintings

Eakins portraiture of Philadelphia mainliners

Theres many many more that Ive not even thought about and these could each make a show to interest art lovers and artists who, are like sponges wantingt to derive new techniques freom works on display in groupings.

Good morning, Farmerman
The van Goghs in question were hung chronologically, making the exhibition an arrangement for interesting (and, perhaps, rewarding) scholarly study--which is fine, but MoMA was promoting this show as the beauty and genius of van Gogh, 24-7--of course!
The only information about location, other than from the individual tags with each painting, came in a final room, which featured a large map of Europe and the UK, with a few small dots marking where van Gogh had lived. I WAS fascinated to see photographs of the various buildings. The connection to the paintings, however, was dependent on the viewer's having an excellent memory--or being an expert in van Gogh, which I am not. I have read the letters and I recognize most of the paintings, but, with van Gogh, that's only scratching the surface.
Van Gogh's letters to Theo and to his sister, Wil, would have been highly useful in this exhibition. They were used very sparingly, however. The only posted quotation I found really illuminating was Vincent writing Wil that, after finishing "The Night Cafe," with its burnt-out denizens, he was now wanting to paint a clean, clear "starry night."
I saw the "Helga show," and I loved it. It took me beneath the surface of Wyeth's interests and skills.
The other potential single-thread shows you mention might work. When I worked at what is now called the Smithsonian Museum of American Art, I saw vaguely similar arrangements, but it would take me many pages to comment on your specific ideas. Suffice it to say, I am in agreement with you that a few, carefully-chosen single-thread shows might work very well--for the general public as well as for art-history scholars. Of the list you propose, which seems most likely to succeed? Then, we could discuss that.

hi Miklos

i'm afraid i don't know much about art exhibitions - but i am a fan of Van Gogh
I've read his letters, too. Also looked a little bit at his influence from the orient (the Japanese printers ).
I have imagined many times what it would feel like to see his paintings 'for real'
I think i understand what you mean about the lack of a 'thread' between each work - there is no 'journey' for the viewer as each painting is disconnected from the others. Maybe even more so because of the singular power behind each painting. Also - if all the paintings were constructed at night i have to ask - did the exhibition convey that by having black walls instead of white - with powerful spot-lights to emulate the moon and a recording of night-time sounds??? I bet not.
(just kidding)

I will be reading on - and trying to learn something.
cheers, e

Hello, Endy

You have defined the problem with this show very precisely: it offers no coherent journey for the viewer, other than a bare chronology, which, not surprisingly, reveals off-days. Painting at night by ambient light was very rare. Van Gogh was experimenting. He remarked in a letter that it really didn't bother him if he couldn't see whether he was dipping his brush in the green or the blue. Of course, some of his night-time explorations work beautifully. Both "Starry Nights" are gorgeous and powerful. However, these huge successes put the less successful examples in this show into deep shade--really not fair to them or to a viewer who wants to connect with the entire exhibition and hear the paintings talk among themselves.

tHERE WAS A bLAKE EXHIBITION AT THE awEST WING OF THE naTIONAL gALLERY MAYBE 20 YEARS AGO. I was there with a colleague who was doing research into Blakes mysticism.

My tastes run to the "how did the artist do it". Id love to see a chrono exhibit of Vermeers works starting with his religious scenes and going to the end of his career.
Also, Id like to see a show of Wyeths "abstractions" , since much of his hyper real stuff was true abstraction .

Hopper has always been my art buddy and I have found his watercolors to be pure dynamite.
I saw a show last year at the Phila Museum that was a display of masterworks of the Hudson River (early and late stuuf) It had Asher Durand, Thomas Cole John Copley , Fitz Hughe Lane, F E Church and several others, all in a single view of the Hudson River and surrounds. Its work ends at about 1890 and was memorable for me to see how the landscapes have changed and , in some cases, have not.

All those would interest me, Farmer.

So, on the question of single-thread exhibitions, for me it would vary with the different exhibitions. If anything, I might be more apt to be interested in a single-thread exhibit than a blockbuster extravaganza.

In the beginning of my (second) gallery days, I was hoping that we would do some shows on themes - one I had in mind was for artists working on land use issues, in various media. Those kind of exhibits didn't happen - too difficult in the planning for too short an exhibit time in a gallery that needed to sell things to survive.

I can enjoy a disjunctive exhibit as well as a coherent one - at base I just like the looking - though I may learn more from a coherent one about a single artist, or artists whose work is related in some way.

Farmerman, We have very similar tastes in art, if the artists you mention are major favorites of yours. Blake and Vermeer are total fascination for me. However, that nagging question of "How did the artist do it?" cannot be answered--ever, because, even if one were able to ask the artist, he or she would not be able to explain how a work, much less an oeuvre was created. A chronological view of an artist's work usually provides fodder for serious speculation on "how," but the conversation will always remain in the area of speculation. To me, this mystery is a positive aspect of art.

Hello, Osso
Yes, save us from more blockbusters. But I don't think any museum is going to stop soon, as patrons have come to expect what Ed Sullivan used to call "a really big show." Single-thread exhibitions that involve more than a single artist can be highly successful. Like Farmer, I saw a wondrous show of Hudson River School painting (in Albany, a couple of years ago). I also helped hang a Church show at the Smithsonian about 40 years ago. Excellent, but the exhibition was not restricted to a single thread of Church's work. I have a hunch that an artist would have to be both highly talented and prolific for a successful, small single-thread show to be made from his or her work.

Okay. I understand that. My idea of single thread is more vaporous than yours, I think. (Well, my mind is more vaporous, so it goes.)

Interesting topic. It might inspire me to look at newly announced shows with this in view.

Miklos, Im that most dangerous of diletante, Im a scientist with a BFA taken as a "hobby". Im a member of several watercolor societies and have been at it for many a year (Im 58 as of Dec 2) so Ive been around.
Im facsinated at your hanging a Church exhibit becauise Ive always wanted to look on the backs of the canvases or boards of artists like that to see the postings and travelogues.

Ive seen several versions of Cotapaxi and several small versions of Niagara and I always wondered about his painting of several editions of a single scene. Ive wondered whether there were any "plein aire" versions of this scene.

Did you work at the NAtional GAllery or one of the many other Smithsonian GAlleries?

My all time fav artist has gotta be VErmeer, followed by Church or Bierstadt. Im always into the "how did they do it" by looking at the glowing colors that are achieved by the underpaint and any overpainting. Ive kept notebooks and in my works today, I try to achieve some of these effects (sometimes succesfully but often not so much)

Farmer,
I, too am a major dilletante--only in the other direction. My degrees are in English, but my long-time fascination has been maths and history of science. And I have attempted crazed mixed projects like coming up with a set theory for literary metaphor, complete with its own notation. No one has been knocking on my door for that one!
The backs of canvases, stretchers, and frames are fascinating. "New" frames of museum quality are so violently expensive, that every effort is made to keep the originals going, which sometimes preserves important history, too. Therefore, there may be several hundred years' accumulation of cryptic words, colored labels, numbers. etc. on the back. Also, occasionally, there are numbers, letters, and words which provide detailed information about the provenance of a painting--who's owned it over the years, where it's been, etc. If you make an appointment with a curator of painting at a museum, telling him you are interested in the details of provenance, and asking if he'd show you the backs of some interesting frames currently not on exhibit, he'd very likely oblige. You'll have a blast!
I helped hang the Church exhibition at what was then called The National Collection of Fine Arts, then the National Museum of American Art, and now the Smithsonian Museum of American Art. Identity crisis in our government? There are often several versions of a "Coatapaxi" or Niagara because collectors would ask the artist to paint another. Of course, some artists who are fascinated with the changes in color in the same scene at different times of day or year also may turn out multiple copies.
We do, indeed, have a lot in common as scientist-artist and writer-mad-scientist with passions for Vermeer and Church. Also, when I used to paint seriously, my medium was watercolor!
You are very smart to keep notebooks of techniques you have seen, because, unless one has a photographic memory, one is not likely to be able to recall that sort of detail easily using memory alone. Also, if you have books, it's easier to contemplate combining techniques from multiple sources.
What area of science do you work in? In your watercolors, do you prefer landscape or figure?

Im an economic geologist (I originally was a chemist in rare earths). Im in applied geoscience rather than theroretical , I own a small geo based company with a diverse client list. Im an ex academic and still maintain an adjunct status as one of a small band of actual experienced mining geos (Many schools blow their budgets on theoretical scientists and discover that their products can be very well degreed but without decent "real world" job opportunities except to teach or become a "museum scientist"(Imagine how few Phd candidates all the museums in the US can suck up each year), yet some Universities (like Penn State) offer actual degree tracks in these pursuits. I try to add some reality to the mix and try to interest students in becoming actual field savvy and practicing geologists at the MS and Phd level. . Imteaching this and next semester and (now since the metals market is in a deep funk), my travel requirements are minimal so I can devote time to taking the kiddies on field surveys . There has been, until very recently, a panicky exploration program for natural gas in PA (my home state)and Ive been fortunate to have several of my clients involved and willing to host several field camps for my students. I had one kid who was doing research into seismic wave propogation and new applications for FAst Fourier transforms finally get a sense of reference of what he can do with his research. (The word duuuhhh, (In a loving manner)often concludes many of my lectures and labs)


My wc's are mostly what Id call "industrial weird" , which combine my views of breakers or rock outcroppings. I also do wildlife art and plein aire . For the last few weeks Ive been doing abstractions of still lifes , something that Id just taken an interest in because of a dinner party we were at in which the plates and dishes were all highly wild and varied. The table made for a very eye catching experience, it turned something on in me and Ive been trying to catch a glimpse of the play of color and form in still scenes as a result.
Ill bet that there are some neat stories on hanging shows of American masters . Ive got several friends who are curators in various media for the WInterthur Foundation. Ive gone with one of them who s been assigned to help restore several old battleflags of the Civil war. I was amazed at their use of high tech equipment and instruments that Im familiar with in my daily practise.

Ive been to several museums that have little paintings by Church, all of them almost copies of a single scene and Ive often wondered as to the basis of his doing such detailed "copies" of a piece that, once done, is like an emblem. My references on Church never went into his multiple paintings of single scenes so I had nothing with which to compare their colors etc. There is one in the Rochester NY museum and another in REading Pa in which the volcano is shown at differing stages of eruption and wondered whether they were done in a blast of creativity or were they carefully copied from each other by "associates" .

Sanford Gifford had done many paintings of a single scene and area in the CAtskills. He did these under different lights and each appears markedly different even though the same mountains appear over and over. Chrch, it appeared to me, was interpreting the same scenes with different foregrounds emblematic of the "Gilded Age", ONe version seems to celebrate the industry of agriculture with Cotopaxi as a backdrop, while another portrays more pastoral scenes. I do know, from my experience in MAine, that Church had done several paintings of what he titled as "Khtaadn" (Mt Katahdin) and , if one were to seriously critique the work just for its chronicling the time, Church was guilty of overromanticizing his surrounds because several of his points of interest in the Katahdin mix, just dont exist. He was being kind of a mannerist in that respect. I love to see his works in a side by side basis and Ive seen several brush techniques that hed used (like really detailed layered glazings to achieve that luminescence for which hes known).

Farmer,
Whoa! You are a REAL scientist--hands-on--in your field. I can understand how one could be a solely lab-based scientist in an area like particle Physics, but Geology begs for its practitioners to get outdoors with tools. I'll bet you've been in many interesting places--beautiful, too--just in North America. I wonder if your practiced eye for landscape forms--and shapes in general--plays directly into your taste in and practice of art. Church and Bierstadt make a great deal out of rock formations, and, of course, Vermeer tends to be highly geometric in his compositions.
I sense and share your pleasure when a student finally "gets" the principles he's been working with because he sees them in practice. I taught English for 30 years, and the big insights do not typically arrive in classroom discussion; they come crashing in from deep geometries in his mind while a kid is WRITING, which is the Lit equivalent of hands-on practice.
Agree with you completely about Church's various "Ktaadn" (sp?) canvases. He takes the general shapes and then gives them the atmosphere he senses emanating from them. You wouldn't want to climb the area using Church's paintings as a map! His drawings of the area seem more literally accurate, however.
Winterthur is an extraordinary place--and they have paintings, as well as LOTS of everything else. A curator could, I'm sure, show you some fascinating frame backs. Cloth restoration, as in the battle flags you mention, is, indeed, now very high-tech in both diagnosis of the issues and correction of them. Big flags can take years of painstaking work. Conservation of paintings can be similarly demanding; when I was at the Smithsonian, their copy of Ryder's "Flying Dutchman" went to the Kecks in Cooperstown for rehab. Took two years! And every step the conservators made was recorded in a book, which, in this case, ran to 300-plus pages. The big problem with Ryders is that he built up multiple coats of paint, never letting any of them fully dry. A logistical nightmare, stabilizing a painting that, after 100 years, still wants to sag! Your knowledge as a rare-earth chemist would have been employed at a number of steps, as the natural pigments of Ryder's time had to be recompounded precisely. It was one of the big moments in my life to hold that small painting in my hands.
I very much like the term "industrial weird." And deriving the inspiration for abstracts from the dishes at a party tells me that you have eyes open for all sorts of possibilities.
Are any of your works posted on-line?

Ill bet my love of works by Vermeer and Church have a lot to do with an innate need for geometric order.

I dont have any work on line cause I never delved into the "hosting" thing and uploading etc. I have tons of pix from sea trips and geo field trips and several of my works that Ive scanned and stored. Im looking at getting a MAc which is more intuitive for pic work and the steps seem more like we think rather than having so many intermediate steps before I can move things about.
Ive used Macs at the U when I taught but, out here in the "real" world , everyone is using PC formats and doesnt care a squat about tonal variations and hue.

Many geo grad students do all of their works away from the field. Geochem and geophysics especially. MAny kids have never even seen a rock but deal with inherent seismic velocities unique to weclogites or omphacites, and theyve never even seen one. Mores the pity, so when I take the kiddies out, we spend a lot of time larnin about the differences between granites, basalts, and trachytes

I have an inborn attraction to geometries. Recently, when there were so many articles on the supposed predictive powers of the symmetry called E8, I was spending way too much time on the net looking for better and better two-dimensional renderings (of a figure with 256 dimensions!).
If you spring for a Mac, you will probably love it. And it does make working with images MUCH easier. When I was still teaching, the machines at work were almost all PCs, which work well but not particularly intuitively. I always enjoyed returning home to my Apple gear. One tip: spend the extra money for large RAM.
You have been to Maine, so you know the odd formations of granite w/basalt that occur here, especially along the northeast coast, where I live. When I was a kid, I combed the beaches for sea glass (red being the grail); now, I look for rocks. The only problem is mass; I always forget a bag, so I come back from a walk with 10-pound pockets.
Do you like Thomas Eakins? Lots of graceful geometry there!

You from MAine?
We have some land up past Eastport where we take an RV and where we were thginking of having a small log home built (We want to split ourtime between Maine and New Mexico)

Im very selctive bout Eakins. I like several of his epics like "Gross Clinic" or the two man Scull. I m not a big fan of his portraits because they require too much investment in knowing about the subjects in orser to even care (Sort of like Sargents portraits).

I find MAcs nice and intuitive even for math modelling where I can go back and forth in series to see what Im conjuring up.

Do you get to see the shows at thr Farnsworth Museum in Rockland? I always liked their collections.

In Eastport, Between Estes Head and Shakford Head, are several old dumps along the water that were used in the late 19th and early 20th century. Theyve been mostly cleaned up but The remaining stuff from the dumps includes lots of old bottles and glass. The waves have washed this stuff and in the cove where the hulk of the USS Minnesota lies are tons of sea glass and old flow blue pottery shards.
The sites are behind the Eastport wooden boat school and near the new Seaport . Bring a bag the next time cause you will get a lot. I didnt know about the "hierarchy" of desirability for seaglass but, my wife has a small path made of blue, violet and green glass that leads to a small lupine garden.

I'm following and enjoying your conversation. Your wife's path and lupine garden sound beautiful, farmer.

Farmerman,
As a property owner near Eastport, I'm sure you know the old saw about being from Maine: "just because kittens are born in the oven that doesn't make them biscuits." 2008 was my 60th summer in Maine, but only my 35th year as a full-time resident. My status, from a real Mainer's POV, MAY have risen from Summer Complaint to Year-round Summer Person. Further than that I cannot go!
If you have a company near Eastport that will weather the current financial storm, and you can spare the resources, this would be a primo time to have that small log cabin built. Also, you would be employing two or three very grateful Mainers.
New Mexico-Maine is a highly attractive pairing! A location like New Mexico is one of very few that could lure me out of Blue Hill for more than a couple of weeks. Our younger daughter lives in Nevada, where she moved for the hiking, and we love visiting her to tromp and (the biggest treat) ride horseback through that state's beautiful canyons. She keeps branching out into other sports designed to gray my hair further: rock-climbing, bouldering, night kayaking, and, most recently, sky-diving. I am hopeful that the parachuting was a one-off. What does your artistic-geometry meter register for native American art of the SW? I really like it.
The Farnsworth Museum in Rockland definitely has a nice collection, but it's now charging a nine-buck admission, which is too steep to encourage broad patronage. No doubt, they need the money, but I wish they'd make one entire day of the week free.
In "The Gross Clinic" and the various sculling paintings, you have picked my favorite Eakinses. I think that, if you look as the portraits merely as portraits--and not as depictions of particular persons--you'll enjoy them a lot. Same goes for Sargent's portraits. Portraits were/are a common way for artists to keep up cash-flow. There was seldom any deep rapport with the sitters. Also, artists have ways of subtly critiquing the sitters they don't like; Sargent is particularly adept at this kind of coded messaging. Look at a Sargent portrait of someone you know from your reading was a real jerk or jerkette, and you will begin to spot some interesting detail. Eakins's drawings have consistently clear geometries; there must be a book of them.
No doubt, you have looked at Sargent's watercolor sketchbooks of his travels abroad; the men and women portrayed in these volumes are personal friends of the artist, and he shows you what he likes about them.
Thank you for the great tip about sea glass. Getting very hard to find around here. There is an artist out on Little Cranberry Island (off SW Harbor; I used to spend summers there, ages 5-9) who collected big-time when the stuff was common. He has an entire wall constructed of sea glass. Supposed to be very beautiful. Your wife's idea for the path to the lupine garden is great, by the way.