galleries (ie the rooms and buildings) are boring

chewy

does anyone who likes going to see art think galleries are very boring and that a white walled rooms is not the best place to see art?


i've gone to the modern art gallery in kilmainham a good few times over the last few years nad i find it a very sterile and underused place...

i think its a good gallery a better irish attempt at a cultural institute

but its so empty an sparse, i als ogo think if you just move all that art closer together you could make room far more interesting activities in this huge building

anybody see a art show that did more then the white walled thing?

okay so your interested in the painting or photo say but add life to gallery space wouldn't always detract from viewing the piece would it


and in a nother thread non-gallery places you seen art

Silent Grape

the point of the white walled thing is so all the attention is on the art piece itself. it wud be a bit pointless to display the art amid countless distractions and 'interesting activities'.

imo, the art should suffice, tbh u sound like u are in primary school and pissed off because ur being made go to the boring art gallery... or something.

i agree that sometimes art gallerys look a little sterile, but then u have to question why u went in in the first place, to see the art, or to be entertained/pleasantly distracted??

DadaKopf

The new Saachi gallery in London is an affront to all that minimalism with its floral wallpaper and ornate carvings - they just took the old city hall and shoved contemporary art works into it. Ironic considering Saachi epitomised that white sterility in the 80s.

I certainly don't mind looking at art in a sterile space or a cluttered space, although the place you're in certainly affects your experience of the art object.

The Tate Modern attempts a synthesis: a combination between traditional elements, new elements like painting some walls funny colours and organizing it thematically, an awesome architectural experience and a commercial experience.

I think people should by all means experiment with the exhibition/gallery format in the same way authors have experimented with writing. Reconfiguring the exhibition context reconfigures the experience and meaning of art.

It seems to me that the trend until recently was to abstract all that situationalism away as much as possible so we could concentrate on the 'true' meaning of the art works. A noble attempt, but maybe we should stir things up a bit.

pork99

Fine art is really marginal today. Modern visual culture is cinema, tv and digital media like computer games. These media fill a place in modern culture once occupied by painting, sculpture, theatre and opera.

chewy

not bored as such just qeustioning...

i'd certainly agree that film and digital media are todays art

i dunno films even if you go see em in the ifc are more 2 hr stories then art as such i i wasn't thinking fine art or modern art...

you'd nearly still have to go to a gallery to see good collection of photos ,photography is till very much a contempoary art form

i think of seeing video art at imma again i find it sterile you can hear the fan of the projecter humming, or the just plonk a tv on a pedastal, it feels like they didn't put any thought into displaying the video art or they don't know how to yet?

not saying i do though....

i guess the place place to see cuttig edge art these days would be on the net , cos it can incoprorate still viedo sound etc, but its not the same as getting off you as and going somewhere...?

spectacleinrock

i find it sterile you can hear the fan of the projecter humming, or the just plonk a tv on a pedastal, it feels like they didn't put any thought into displaying the video art or they don't know how to yet?

The fan of the projector is just like a non plain coloured wall in displaying an art work- a distraction. If anyone has seen the exhibition in the gallery of photography at the mo will know what i mean- cables everywhere, adapters etc- but its at the end of the day its the art thats imortant.

IMMA have made a far better job than any gallery in dublin at presenting video work. As for complaining about fan projectors- arent you being just a little bit fussy??? Its to do with the technology rather than the presentation.

IMMA is probably a sterile enviorment because of its history. I think buildings keep their aura and it was designed as a hospital so sub consciously its probably how you respond to it.

IMMAs main problem is its location- you have to plan to go there rather than just popping in. So the curious art viewer is generally left with awful abstract paintings in the commercial galleries which resemble the stuff produced on changing rooms, and the art of the seventies in every other country.

rant over!