Towards the end of our time studying abroad I found myself
excited to visit the Centre Pompidou for a number of reasons. 1) I had been
outside the building countless times throughout my stay in Paris and I had yet
to enter the peculiar structure to see what it was all about. 2) At this point
in our trip I found myself a little burned out. Every time we entered a museum,
church, or chateau I was increasingly losing interest in what I was seeing.
Everything had begun to feel the same, and I had lost some of the excitement I
once had for the historic places we were visiting.
For me, Pompido u was a refreshing break from everything we
had done up until that point. Though I didn’t spend hours and hours in the
museum admiring the work, the visit I had seemed be just what I needed to get
out of the funk I was about to fall into of not being fully engaged in the
sites we were visiting. My whole life museums have been a hit or miss activity
with me. Rarely am I the person lurking in each room listening to the audiotape
or reading each plaque. Normally, only a few elements of what I see intrigue me
enough to spark my interest in seeking out more information on them. However,
at Pompidou I found myself constantly engaged with the art I was seeing.
Whether it was because I thought it was ridiculous or because I somehow
connected with the piece, the entire visit seemed to come at the perfect time
for me, giving me another burst of enthusiasm for the city I was living in and
the opportunities I had to see countless artistic and historical sites.
Our assignment for the visit was to pick one piece that
stood out to us, whether we liked the piece or questioned why it was art. As I
said before, I found myself constantly connecting or questioning pieces in
Pompidou but it wasn’t until the end that I found something I felt I could
write about. One of the last rooms I entered held a piece by Rachel Harrison
named Syntha-6. Though there was a number of pieces in which I asked myself the
question “What qualified this as worthy of being in a museum?” this one really
irked me. Maybe it was because it was at the end of my visit, and I had
increasingly become baffled by the number of pieces that seemed too simple or bizarre to be considered art.
The piece (pictured to the right) was an interesting
colorful sculpture, and atop the figure stood a jumbo sized container of
Syntha-6 protein powder. In my opinion the colors worked well together, and it
was interesting. But what confused me was that the artist took the time to
create this sculpture and then chose to put some material object on top of it.
Sure, I know you can use everyday objects to make a statement, or manipulate
objects to make a new object, but this seemed different. To me, it was as if
she made a sculpture and felt it was unfinished, so she looked around the room
and took the container of protein powder she’d used to make a shake that
morning and plopped it atop the piece and called it good. Now, I’m sure there
was much more thought put behind the piece, but I frankly couldn’t bring myself
to figure it out. It served as my last straw with the Pompidou, and after
making sure to photograph it I quickly exited the museum and went back out into
Paris reenergized and ready to take on the final weeks of my time abroad.
In an art history course last semester, I remember briefly discussing Rachael Harrison. We studied a particular series of her sculptures titled "The Help", and I'm fairly certain that this sculpture falls within that group. These sculptures are essentially large pieces of styrofoam, covered in a layer of paint, with some ready-made items thrown in. I can see where this type of sculpture might bring about some confusion, and why it might seem non-cohesive.
ReplyDeleteIn some respect, thats what the piece attempts to do. The deformed/mishappen figure is supposed to represent a figure in need of repair. The ready made objects within this series are supposed to imply that need. For example, the protein can within this piece suggests that the subject must work towards a better shape.
This is definatly a challenging piece whose meaning is not explicitly apparent. I dont blame you for your confusion.