On the 18th I went to the Speed art museum.
It's a nice little museum.
There were two special exhibits, one on art in household design, and the other on Impressionist landscapes.
I first encountered the household design.
I actually own one of these tea kettles. I bought it many years ago from Museum of Modern Art (in NYC) catalog.
It doesn't pour very well, and if you don't hold it just so, the lid opens, allowing steam to boil your wrist. Not really my idea of good design, when it doesn't function properly, however much I may like the nice clean shape......
I liked the leaves, and when I read the info I was surprised to learn it is melamine.
I am used to thinking of melamine as the substance from which "ordinary everyday dishes of the 1950s" were made. I believe this is the only example I've ever seen of intent to make art with melamine.
Love this poster.
Unfortunately, it's more ironic than one would hope. Just a couple of very minor Monets appeared in the exhibit. In fact, nearly all of the paintings were by American artists. Only a few minor paintings by anyone whose name I recognized.
Luckily, those American artists had a lot of talent, and painted a lot of very interesting work.
Do you know Jane Peterson? (More biography here, but no images, alas.) I did not know her, but loved both of her paintings in this exhibit. One was of a Turkish fountain (she traveled extensively, and painted everywhere), and the other of a woman with a red parasol in a garden. The flowers drew me first, but then I noticed the way the parasol was held up to the sun, and the way Peterson captured the red red red light that came through the parasol as it fell on the woman's face, arm, dress. Wow. A tour de force of light and color. I would totally buy a print of this work, if I could find one!
Despite a sign on the way into the exhibit saying "show us your pictures!" which invited people to share images with the museum, and which I took to be an invitation to take pics of the exhibit, I was scolded for doing so. I try to be polite. I do. Even when I think it is stupid that I am told not to take pics of something. I hadn't seen anything that said we ought not to take pics. The person who took my admission ticket didn't say anything, despite the camera I had (outside its case) around my neck. I hate being scolded. Especially when I'm not sure the person scolding me has a leg to stand on............................
But that's why I'm not showing you any pics.
Harumph.
Ok, back to the work-I-can't-show-you..........
Do you know Charles Courtney Curran? He liked to paint pretty women in interesting settings. This painting was in the exhibit. You can't see it well in this image, of course, but I was very taken with the way he rendered the light on the edges of their faces, in their hair, and in their lacy dresses.
I enjoyed the paintings in the exhibit, but wish they'd advertised it as "mostly American" work rather than implying there would be work by the iconic Impressionists.
The museum actually owns some work by well-known Impressionists, but not landscapes.....
There was a naked baby, by Mary Cassatt, in the permanent collection.
Here is a Cezanne. I'm struck by the contrast between the simple clean lines of the painting, and the heavily decorated frame........
Ok, let's look at some more stuff.
Art deco vase.
There was a gallery with "the art of Kentucky."
Silver, made by Asa Blanchard in the first quarter of the 19th century. Comparing it, in my mind, to that shiny stainless tea kettle above..............
Another piece of silver from "the art of Kentucky."
Elegant! Maybe intended for teeny tiny lady-like cups? Imagining my tea would be cold before I could get enough out of that teeny tiny spout to fill my usual mug.
Kind of amused by the description, so here it is:
I often think about the cost of the things I am looking at, but I almost never see that mentioned in an art museum's explanations.
Since my last trip away from Ann Arbor was to France, I've been thinking a lot about the differences and similarities between Louisville and France.
Here's something that was as old as a lot of the things we saw in France.
Of course my documentation was awful, alas, but this is one of those dark carved-wood rooms that was removed, lock, stock, and barrel, from a grand British dwelling, and recreated in an American home.
When one thinks of the cost of something..................................
Wondering how many thousands of person-hours went into its creation........... (Not to mention the dismantlement and recreation!)
It was Elizabethan, if I remember correctly.
This was over the fireplace.
The Speed also has a nice collection of artifacts made by First Nations plains peoples. I took several pictures there, but between the low light and the plexiglass, all were very blurry, alas. They had many pieces that were old enough to be decorated with colored porcupine quills, as well as many more that were beaded.
After the art museum, I went to see one of the parks designed by Frederick Law Olmsted (who also designed NYC's Central Park).
This is Iroquois Park. I'd thought I might get out and walk, but found only one tiny parking lot (about 8 cars worth). I suppose that's not a surprise, as Olmsted worked long before there were cars............
I drove through, and then drove back much more slowly, as I pulled over and waved around any cars that came up behind me on the return trip.
I was going less than five miles per hour when I took this, and there were no pedestrians for dozens of yards. (A few are visible on the far end of the road that can be seen here.)
This is very representative of what I saw of the park. Road, winding through woods. Bird song. Wind in leaves. Even frogs, in one marshy area. How lovely to get away from the incessant expressway traffic noise downtown!
There actually were lots of people in the pedestrian lane (on the right in the image above). Lots of people and dogs. This park is very up-and-down; a walk through it would be a strenuous walk. Essentially none of the people looked like they were in good shape. I (silently) applauded their activity, and hoped they would keep it up.
I discovered, on my way south on Third Street to the art museum, that there were a lot of very interesting houses and other buildings all along Third. I didn't stop on my way down, but on the way back............
It was easy to pull over and park, get out and walk a few blocks, return to the car and move on a bit.............
I spoke to a man who was cleaning up his yard. He told me this was the most extensive Victorian neighborhood in the US. I believe him. There are hundreds and hundreds of buildings in in this area.
With gardens just beginning to bloom.
Hellebores.
Daffodil.
Oh my. *Serious* see-the-inside craving.........
I'm not all that fond of yellow brick, but felt very sorry for this old abandoned girl.
Look at this window, on the second floor. Wonder that room, on second floor, rates such a lovely thing?
We can see right through that window, through the roof. Alas.
Someone cared, once upon a time, to embellish her extensively.
I wonder how much it would cost to buy her, and how much to bring her back to her glory.
This is about my speed, decoration-wise. Some interesting brick work, and a few wooden details at the top............
Forsythia.
Fancy windows and doors....... I didn't notice that the arched part of the window was fancy, until I saw this "on the big screen".....
Love this window.
In order to facilitate reading the Louisville posts in chronological order, I have put a link at the end of each post to the next one. The post after this one is here.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment