I have seen MoMA’s permanent collection several times during my past six years living in the city yet it is always a different experience when you go see an exhibition or collection with a specific purpose. In this case, it is to keep in mind what we have learned so far in terms of different concepts of illusion. I found a few pieces that I wouldn’t usually ponder about before ITP.

1. Giorgio de Chirico, The Double Dream of Spring Paris, January-May 1915, Oil on canvas, 22 1/8 x 21 3/8″ (56.2 x 54.3 cm)

Inspired by Surrealism yet achieved in neoclassical painting style, Chirico often distorts architectural perspectives to disorient the viewer. The Double Dream of Spring Paris reminded me of Brunelleschi’s Experiment. The proportion of the figures as well as the depth of the background do not match up with the reality yet the drawing  on the canvas gives logic to the fictional world which makes the viewing experience confusing yet captivating. 


2. Marcel Duchamp, Anemic Cinema, 1926, 35mm film (black and white, silent), 7 min.

I thought about how Duchamp’s Anemic Cinema could be the pioneer of new media art when I saw this work. There clearly isn’t any interaction that involves a computer yet the text and pattern of the disc that evolves overtime create an illusion of depth and movement on a flat surface.


3. Two Children Are Threatened by a Nightingale (Deux Enfants sont menacés par un rossignol), 1924, Oil with painted wood elements and cut-and-pasted printed paper on wood with wood frame, 27 1/2 x 22 1/2 x 4 1/2″ (69.8 x 57.1 x 11.4 cm).

I like the combination of painting and sculpture that creates an odd sense of depth where two dimensions are able to intertwine. The orange house reminded me of the little doll house door from my midterm group project.


4. Stephen Shore

I forgot to took picture of the label of this piece and couldn’t retrieve it from MoMA’s website. There were three microscope situated on the table where the viewer can peek into Shore’s film through the lenses. Each microscope consists of a few slides that viewers and select from. I find it fascinating how the sense of depth can be elaborated by setting up a closed and dark environment with only one light source going through the film. The experience of looking into something small also resembles the peephole we created for my midterm group project which is a helpful reference if we were to further expand the concept in the future.


5. Robert Morris, Untitled from the Firestorm series, 1982, Charcoal, ink, graphite, and airbrushed pigment on paper, 76 x 200 1/8″ (193.2 x 508.4 cm) overall; 38 x 50″ (96.6 x 127.1 cm) each panel. 

Katie didn’t give us a talk on this drawing yet I was drawn to it as we passed by. From my previous knowledge in art history, Morris’ work are often referred as process art due to his emphasis on the process rather than the visual outcome. There are moments in the drawing where body parts can be depicted while others are the after image of various movements which allows me to visualize and give value to the process. I am especially intrigued by the juxtaposition of strong ink strokes and soft graphite that rubs into the paper. It is interesting to think about how to archive something temporary such as a performance with medium other than video and photography.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *