March 22, 2005
The Flavin Retrospective
Ludwig and I visited the beautiful Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth this afternoon and we were pleased to see that there was a traveling exhibition that we hadn't seen before. Unhappily, the featured artist was Mr. Dan Flavin (1933-1996), an American minimalist that worked, almost exclusively, in fluorescent light bulbs. Most rooms contained large assemblies of these hideous lights, in one or two colors, arranged in simple geometric patterns. Mr. Flavin discovered the square, the rectangle, the circle, and even (in what appears to be his masterpiece) the grid. It was mostly overwhelmingly pedestrian, but there were one or two pieces that are simply unpleasant to view.
Okay, so what do I know? I know less about art than I do about astrophysics, and that really isn't much. There is plenty of favorable criticism on Mr. Flavin online, and I'm sure he has more fans than I do, but I just don't get it. Often, art is in the vision, not the rendering, and I know it's a tired criticism of modern art that it can't be good if I could create it, but I think my dislike for this exhibition isn't that simple. It seems uninspired, simplistic, derivative, and (sometimes) visually repugnant. What's more, a high school shop student could create one of these things and sneak it into the museum one night, and the most informed art critic couldn't tell the difference.
But don't take my word for it. The Modern will be hosting the exhibition until June fifth. If you have the chance to see it for yourself, I would be interested to hear your opinions.
The problem with art like this (or any art) is that one has to know the context, what the artist is reacting against, to judge it properly. It's hard to judge the aesthetic value online, too. I guess I'll have to go to the exhibit and see what I think. :)
Right. Some of this stuff dated back into the 60s, when it must have been pretty radical. It was less understandable why he continued to do the same thing into the 80s, but again, context is probably essential.
That said, the interesting thing about the exhibit is less the art than the way it is placed strategically in the museum space--and that was, at best, hit and miss.