Louise Bourgeois
This past weekend I checked out the Louise Bourgeois exhibit at the Guggenheim. Some of
her work was really breathtaking. It was incredibly apparent how personal each piece on display was to the artist. In most of her pieces, she plays with the relation of the person to the group, a hard and soft duality, and a juxtaposition of elements of male and female anatomy. For example, pieces that suggest organic subjects may not only be interpreted as either phalluses or breasts, but may also be shown in a contrasting hard material like marble or bronze. Form-wise, I found Arch of Hysteria from 1993 her most intriguing piece. Made from bronze, the headless arched sculpture floats midair from the ceiling. It seems graceful but there is a tension in the straining of the body’s muscles. Its interest lies in its interaction with the viewer – it is a confrontational piece and the limbs provide an entirely different view depending on where the viewer is standing. Conceptually, I thought that Bourgeois’ “cells” were her strongest pieces. The Guggenheim exhibition guide describes these works as “a series of haunting, roomlike spaces, in a manifestation of the architectural imagery that pervades her earliest work. Bourgeois refers to these installations as Cells, a term that invites associations with incarceration and monastic contemplation, as well as the most basic element of the human body. Combining sculptural works with found objects she amassed throughout her life, these complex assemblages are vessels for potent psychological narratives, revealing with unprecedented emotional intensity the artist’s attempt to confront and transmute her own history.” The cells are shaped by multiple scrap wood doors (sort of like a fort) with personal memorabilia or metaphoric objects hidden (protected) inside. While all of Bourgeois’ work is extremely personal, I found it odd that some cells were completely closed off from the viewer. Some doors even coincidentally had “private” in transfer lettering on the opaque window. Bourgeois is always in control of her work, though. She purposefully orients the doors to keep the viewer from taking in all of the work/all of her private childhood memories. This parallels the idea that the door itself is something that can invite someone in or close so
meone off.
her work was really breathtaking. It was incredibly apparent how personal each piece on display was to the artist. In most of her pieces, she plays with the relation of the person to the group, a hard and soft duality, and a juxtaposition of elements of male and female anatomy. For example, pieces that suggest organic subjects may not only be interpreted as either phalluses or breasts, but may also be shown in a contrasting hard material like marble or bronze. Form-wise, I found Arch of Hysteria from 1993 her most intriguing piece. Made from bronze, the headless arched sculpture floats midair from the ceiling. It seems graceful but there is a tension in the straining of the body’s muscles. Its interest lies in its interaction with the viewer – it is a confrontational piece and the limbs provide an entirely different view depending on where the viewer is standing. Conceptually, I thought that Bourgeois’ “cells” were her strongest pieces. The Guggenheim exhibition guide describes these works as “a series of haunting, roomlike spaces, in a manifestation of the architectural imagery that pervades her earliest work. Bourgeois refers to these installations as Cells, a term that invites associations with incarceration and monastic contemplation, as well as the most basic element of the human body. Combining sculptural works with found objects she amassed throughout her life, these complex assemblages are vessels for potent psychological narratives, revealing with unprecedented emotional intensity the artist’s attempt to confront and transmute her own history.” The cells are shaped by multiple scrap wood doors (sort of like a fort) with personal memorabilia or metaphoric objects hidden (protected) inside. While all of Bourgeois’ work is extremely personal, I found it odd that some cells were completely closed off from the viewer. Some doors even coincidentally had “private” in transfer lettering on the opaque window. Bourgeois is always in control of her work, though. She purposefully orients the doors to keep the viewer from taking in all of the work/all of her private childhood memories. This parallels the idea that the door itself is something that can invite someone in or close so
meone off.
No comments:
Post a Comment