Friday, July 8, 2005

TAKING THE KIDS TO THE WARHOL

That sounds like it should be a euphemistic catchphrase, and so it will be. Now I need only to figure out (1) what it should euphemize (suggestions welcome) and (2) how to inject it into popular discourse. I'm already working on overusing another such phrase ("plays rugby for Vassar") into ubiquity.

So, yeah, we took the kids to the Warhol tonight. Ali's been teaching the older girls about art styles, and Warhol's silkscreens came up. It seemed fitting to go to where you can see a wallfull of Marilyns. It was mildly enjoyable, but it was less that what I'd hoped, and I think it's because Warhol's vision won and won big. Advertising is art now, and a degree of elevation of the common (as opposed to the uncommon or the transcendent) is part and parcel of our cultural language. It's lost its potency.

4 comments:

  1. Still on my short list of places to see in this country, along with the Dan Flavin Art Institute. I mean, I've seen tons of his work in IRL life already (the Menil Collection in Houston has a room dedicated to him, and it's primarily disaster series, which is a plus) but, you know, mylar clouds. Don't get to see that every day!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Also, do they have any of his lobster series at the museum? I've always liked those and I'm really not sure why.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No lobsters.

    Ha-- funny that you mention the mylar clouds. As you can imagine, whether the Warhol is the optimum place to take preteens is up for debate. We had to avoid the John Waters exhibit in toto. The mylar cloud room was the consolation prize for kids everyone mentioned, and we get there and the kids love it, but then my eight year-old turns to me in the midst of batting one of them in the air and says, "This isn't art."

    ReplyDelete
  4. That's the funniest thing I've heard today.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.