LACMArt History
by AnnaLiese Burich ‘17
Museums: they’re either something you love or you hate. Or, you don’t like them but pretend you do to maintain your #artsy hipster and persona. Me? I love them. I especially love modern art; for a hot second last year, my dream job was to be the curator of the MoMA in New York. I used to be an art history major, so when I go to museums I don’t see random doodles on a white wall. When I see a black canvas, I don’t think to myself “Psh, I could have done that,” but instead of the rich layers of meaning associated with it, both historical and symbolical.
So, to help you maybe appreciate art the way I do—or at least not be as scared or skeptical of it—I went to the LACMA this weekend and picked some pieces of modern art that I like to help you maybe like them too. Plus next time you go with your friends you can impress them with your “new” perspective on the pieces. Props to my USC art history professors for the knowledge!
1) “Cold Shoulder,” Roy Lichtenstein - 1963
Let’s start with the easier one: everyone can get behind Roy Lichtenstein, right? The subjects are actual people and the colors are bold and pretty. But it’s more than just a fun cartoon picture: it’s a statement on modern society. Lichtenstein hand painted the “benday dots,” the mechanized process of dots that comprised the colors of comic books. Society in the 60s was increasingly mechanized and artificial—this was the era of plastic—so he responded by using his human hands to replicate a machine’s claws. He took squares from real life comic books, too—isolated and out of context, though, they took on haunting meaning, often of the plight of the objectified female in the 1960s society. We all know enough about Mad Men to know that women were treated as toys during the 60s, so that Lichtenstein called men out on their mistreatment of the vulnerable women was pretty cool.
2) “White Center,” Mark Rothko- 1957
What is this? Just colors? I could have painted that! If that’s something you just said, I dare you to actually try. My high school art history teacher gave our class that very assignment, and needless to say everyone failed. These colors are called “cloud forms,” and the different shades, fading, and hazy edges are all expertly placed to evoke specific emotions. Colors are scientifically proven to evoke certain emotions, so Rothko plays with our minds with strategically placed colors and combinations of colors. I was once given the tip to stand as close to the painting as the museum allows, so the colors fill your whole frame of vision, and see what you feel. It’s really quite a magical experience to lose yourself in pure color—in pure emotion. Next time you’re at the LACMA, I dare you to try it.
3) “The Treachery of Images,” Renee Magritte, 1929
If you see this and go, “Hey, that’s the painting from The Fault in Our Stars!” then you have oh so much more to learn. John Green is smart, so there’s a reason he chose to highlight this painting. This is arguably my favorite painting—it makes us question everything about art and objects. “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” means “This is not a pipe.” Because it’s not a pipe, if you think about it. It’s only paint on canvas. If you think it’s actually a pipe, the every-sassy Magritte says with this painting, then you’re stupid. He calls into question the meaning of art and representation—and, effectively, centuries of art history. For centuries before him, people had been worshipping representations of people and objects and gods as if it they were the real deal; heck, even in the Bible, the people worship a representation of God. In the Bible, they are called out on their idolatry, and here, Magritte does the same: he calls out modern art viewers on modern-day idolatry. Artists were trying to make the subjects of paintings as real as possible to be true to life, and viewers were looking to paintings for representations of real life. But Magritte calls them out: he says that art is nothing but paint; we assign so much meaning to it, but it’s all false and superficial. Yet, you might be thinking, he made a piece of art himself. You’re right—he made something and called it art. This is his distinction: art is what the artist deems art; artists are not limited to real subjects, nor should they be. And thus, with his rebellious message, a whole new era of art commenced.
4) “Hexagonal Wt,” Mary Corse – 1965
Hey hey hey, it’s my favorite white canvas! This solid color trend started in 1913 when the Russian artist Kasmir Malevich painted a square canvas black, put it in the corner of the room normally reserved for religious icons, and called it “Black Square.” In his case, the black was meant as a statement against religion, that religion and icons were superficial and meaningless. But artists took notice, and to this day, solid color canvases are still in vogue. It all goes back to what I said before: it is art if the artist calls it art. The artist has a message, or an idea, and conveys it in the way they deem fit; it’s our job to get inside their heads and imagine what their message is. Now, I haven’t read up on this particular piece by Mary Corse, but here’s some conjecturing based on what I know about modern art: her canvas is not about the canvas, but about the space around the canvas. The white canvas blends into the white wall, which she knew would happen—museum walls are always white. She also knew that museum walls are well lit. So, it was safe to assume that a dramatic shadow would be created around the canvas. I would hazard to say that we are meant to look at the hexagonal shadow more than the white canvas itself. The art is in the shadow; interpret this statement as you will. Here, you get to play an analytical detective. Perhaps life is shadow; perhaps the hexagon means that life is regimented, geometrical, and rigid; perhaps it’s a comment on the white-wall museum culture, that we all look at the art but not the museum itself.
***
The possible meanings are endless! And that’s why I love
modern art. It’s not self-explanatory; what fun is it to look at a portrait of
a king and know that he was a king? I would rather be able to stand in front of
a painting and get my creative juices flowing; all you have to do is put the
painting in the context of other art and cultural history as a whole, and you
are well on your way to making an educated guess as to the artist’s meaning.
Modern art is more about the artist than the subject; modern art is a window
into the artist’s mind, and I love being able to mine the heck out of it.
So please: go to the LACMA and get your detective cap on. It’s creative, it’s cultural, it’s historical, and it’s fun. And students get in with a discount and there’s good food. Why not?
