There was an Atget exhibit on the 3rd floor. An old friend who is always nice and reassuring to see again, quiet, understated, and workmanlike, someone who never even considered himself an artist, and always an inspiration to an old photographer who is finding it increasingly hard to find the energy to get back in the dark room. Someone who reaffirms my belief that photography is not so much art, as the process of documenting reality artistically.
And then there was the Cindy Sherman retrospective mentioned in the last entry. A Long Island girl who has made it bigger than big. 375 photographs of herself in various guises and costumes and personas. Creative early in her career, but one who becomes increasingly/irritatingly tedious, repetitive, and trite after a while, in spite of the many greatly oversized and overwrought later images that dominated the show, but she is described by some as one of the most important artists of the 20th century. HUH???? One tepid photograph of herself, nothing I would want on my wall, recently sold at auction for 3.1 million dollars!!! For a mundane photograph by contemporary artist??? Somehow I kind of understood it when a Gursky photo sold for 1 million a few years ago. Just a photo, but it was spectacular. But a Cindy Sherman image of herself??? I don't get it. Was talking to the director of photography at an auction house in NYC recently and asked her about the 3.1 mil sale. She said it was Cindy Sherman after all, did not seem perplexed, and looked at me like there was something wrong with me for not getting it. Sorry for going on about it, but..
MOMA for free...But no photos allowed in the exhibits, so here is my take on free Fridays...Pretty cutting edge, huh???
I like it, but I didn't know how interesting it was till I got home. The idea is good, but the execution could be a bit better. I need another MOMAfreefriday soon.
Pablo