Why? My Impressions of Modern Art

Why?

Ellsworth Kelly 'Curved Red on Blue'

When reflecting upon visiting the Museum of Modern Art on Friday there is one simple question that most easily comes to mind; why?  While I understand that there is a purpose and appreciation among a certain audience for modern art, I would find it extremely difficult to claim that I have the slightest clue or understanding for it.  There were few occasions where I walked up to the piece of artwork and was able to make a quick guess as to what it was about or what the artist was trying to get at.  Most of the artwork involved an initial glance, a review of the description on the wall, and several minutes of attempting to comprehend the meaning behind it.  For the vast majority of the pieces, I was still left in confusion as to the meaning behind it and the artist’s reasons for making the piece. 

Amidst the confusion and lack of understanding of modern art as a whole, I did enjoy some of the pieces and could appreciate the artistic process.  In one of the first rooms, the museum housed a couple of Anselm Kiefer’s pieces, including Aschenblume.  I will admit that I didn’t get the symbolism and meaning until I read the card next to it, but I thought that it was a tremendous piece of artwork that obviously took a lot of time and work to create.  As I moved from left to right while viewing the painting I noticed that it moved with you and seemed to be giving different vantage points.  I also enjoyed Alain Jaquet’s ‘Camouflage Boticelli (Birth of Venus)’, which played off of a reaction to Boticelli’s ‘Birth of Venus’ and a mix of modern influences with shell gas.  This painting caught my interest because it wasn’t completely straightforward and required a little background, but I didn’t find myself asking ‘why?’.  It isn’t that I am against art that challenges you to think, but I did have difficulties with finding some of the modern art being ambiguous to the point of frustration.  For instance, when viewing the museum’s entire set of Sean Scully’s ‘Catherine’ collection, I simply could not wrap my head around why someone would create 8 paintings that were simply stripes in different patterns and colors, all with the same title. 

After thinking about all of the artwork that I encountered I have concluded that I only have some general ideas of what modern art is about.  In class, we discussed how the modernism movement was a reaction to movements such as romanticism, realism, and naturalism.  The movement was rejecting what came before it and the expectations of society.  Thinking about the main goals of the movement, it seems like the modernist artists took these ideas to the extreme and tried to defy anything done before.  The artwork doesn’t answer or fulfill any expectations and challenges the audience however it can.  Just like the stories that we have been reading in class, void of satisfying conclusions, the pieces doesn’t have immediate messages or an overall apparent meaning.  Although I don’t have much understanding when it comes to the artwork, I will admit the artists succeed in forcing others to think and challenge society. 

Overall, I thought the trip to the museum and the experience with modern art was both interesting and confusing.  Even though I can appreciate the movement and those behind it I am still left with my initial impulses to ask why.  Why paint an entire collection of stripes? Why were so many works left untitled?  Why present a piece of scrap metal as a sculpture? Why so much ambiguity? Why?