FIAC

FIAC is a contemporary art show that dominates Paris every fall for one weekend. Hundreds of galleries are invited to show their work and present the artists that they find influential, with the hopes of making a sale and creating some buzz. FIAC this year was held in the Grand Palais and the large space was divided up into hundreds of small white cubes in which each gallery could claim and creates its own space. Within each of these spaces the artwork must be presented, but also there are tables, chairs, lighting, and special arrangement that must be taken into consideration. The challenge of creating these mini exhibitions is making an environment that is engaging, but also practical. “In addition to identifying the critical components of displays, it is also important to establish how these components complement and reinforce each other in a system of representation” (23, Moser) 

My initial reaction to the space is that it can be extremely overwhelming. Tackling the entire thing in a couple of hours is a challenge and you start to feel like you’re looking at the same space over and over again. Fortunately throughout the space there are small places to rest and eat, so a visitor is able to stop and take in the somewhat chaotic atmosphere. Unlike museums this space what not chronologically ordered, there was no sense of time, since the art work was created at different stages. There was not even a sense of category because most of the galleries were from different countries, but they were not placed together. The only common theme was that if the gallery was prominent and had a rather large collection they were given bigger spaces towards the front, and if they were smaller and had only one or two pieces they were mixed in among the masses.

The concept of the white cube is often what baffles me most about art conventions. The white cube is a generic space that has white floors and ceilings there is little character to it, yet it is the main formula for an art gallery. As I wondered around I kept thinking of how a gallery could make themselves stand out, change the cube, give it color, give it sounds. However, would that take away from the artwork? “The minimalist art-gallery approach sees objects presented as esthetic icons and powerful symbols of cultural identity.” (27, Moser) This idea goes with the self-importance that contemporary art carries. That one piece of art can change a mindset. 

The most interesting part of these exhibitions is to see what is actually selling and what artists and curators are inspired by. It’s strange to say, but through these galleries, an audience can get a decent understanding of how society is viewing the world. Yes, a lot of art is made for pleasure or to aesthetically enhance a room. However, there are artists that create for reaction, and have a purpose in what they want to say. The challenge is getting their message out there in a way that an audience can receive it and an exhibition space can deliver correctly. 

Work Cited

Moser, Stephanie. "The Devil Is in the Detail: Museum Displays and the Creation of Knowledge." Museum Anthrogology.

Museé Jacquemart-André

Museé Jacquemart-André

 

The Museé Jacquemart-André is located in the 8^eme of Paris. It is an expensive zip code with and impressive collection. The collection was founded by Edouard André and Néile Jacquemart in the late 19^th century. The couple dedicated there later lives to constructing the collection, and estate. The house was constructed in 1881 and is a perfect example of what wealth and power could produce during that time. The museum creates a heritage for the couple, and they live on through their collection. 

Upon entering the mansion you are greeted by a grand entrance way. Each room is decorated in its own color and period style according to its function. The ceilings are decorated with frescos and the collection includes artists such as Rembrant, Vigee- Lebrun, Francois Boucher, Botticelli, and many more. What is interesting about the time that this house was created was that it was just after the revolution. France was going into a new era, and the cities landscape was changing dramatically. Many of the objects that are located within the mansion are taken from other grander town homes such as the fire places and the tapestries. It is recycled furniture that is put to new use. 

The way that the house is displayed is by preservation, the artwork and the rooms have changed ver little since Néile Jacquemart died. Thus this creates another world for the audience; they feel as though they are walking through time. As went with the time each room had a specific purpose, the grand rooms for dancing, the smoking chamber for the men, even the secret passages that line the house were constructed so that Néile could visit her husband when he was ill. What is nice about this museum is that it teaches you about society in the 19^th century, as well as letting you view some spectacular paintings. The indoor winter garden was all the rage during the time and allowed guests to feel like they were outside, when they were inside. “Heritage, as a mode of understanding the past, is inseparable from the displays that it represents it. Put somewhat differently, a heritage display or representation is intentionally, a cultural explicating device.” (204, Hoelscher) 

The intention of the collection was actually made to decorate the mansion. Each painting and sculpture is placed for a specific purpose and is categorized by country. Downstairs you will find French and Flemish painters. While ascending upstairs you walk into a renaissance Italy with ceilings and entrance ways taken from Italian auctions. The art work is early 16^th century, with an incredible selection of the Madonna and Child. The bedrooms are downstairs and to the side of the mansion, the audience can tell the main purpose of the space was entertainment. 

As a money making museum they know their market. It is a small museum in many ways, but also because the collection is not overwhelming it’s the perfect place to spend the afternoon. The museum hosts a restaurant and an extensive gift shop. Since this museum is not as popular as the Louvre or the Pompidou it must make small profits where it can. The Louvre and the Pompidou are called Superstar museums and “have become household names for millions of people. They are able to exploit the economies of scale in reaching out to a large number of people.” (410, Frey and Meier) 

Not being extremely popular is a blessing and a curse. On the one hand you have a select clientele that come for a specific purpose and are willing to spend the extra euro. On the other hand the Louvre is guaranteed to attract a certain number of visitors per day and therefore does not have to worry as much about the profit the museum makes. “Museums have a high fixed cost and low variable cost; the marginal cost of an additional visitor is close to zero; the cost of museums have a dynamic component with is disadvantageous for the enterprise; and opportunity costs constitute a substantial part of the costs of a museum” (399, Frey and Meier) Essentially ever euro counts. In addition to the gift shop and restaurant the Jacquemart-André can also charge for special exhibitions, like the Canaletto exhibition on view now. It seems bizarre and almost like your being extorted for something which is part of Paris’ culture. Yet without charging and creating some form of revenue this museum could never reach it potential. 

This museum is a view into another world. It is seeing how the other half lived, and what they were interested in collecting. Since neither Néile nor Edouard had any children this collection is what they have left a symbol of wealth and beauty. Making this museum another one of the many little gems that Paris has to offer. 

Works Cited

Frey, Bruno S., and Stephan Meier. "Cultural Economics." A Companion to Museum Studies. By Sharon Macdonald. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2006. 398-413. Print.

Hoelscher, Steven. "Heritage." A Companion to Museum Studies. By Sharon Macdonald. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2006. 198-217. Print.

Natural History Museums

Natural History Museum

The history museums of Galeries de Palentologie et d’Anatomie and Grande Galerie de l’Evolution are about the evolution of life. How animals have evolved and changed over time. Starting with the Palentogie and anatomy museum, it is reminiscent of the Fragonard. Upon walking in it is set up so that you are consumed by the mass amounts of animal skeletons that appear to be charging at you. Along the sides there are cabinets filled with multiples of the same skeletons. It is a warehouse for the grand collection that the museum has acquired. The challenge of a museum like this is that with such inanimate objects how does the museum bring them to life, and reinvent the living. Engaging you audience, and knowing who your audience is. The anatomy museum did this by looking through the eyes of a child. They animated there skeletons by having them climb up trees, or stampede in the one direction. There was also a hint of technology involved with videos of how the animals acted in real life. The museum managed to separate the different genres by floor so you had animals on the first, dinosaurs on the second, and fossils on the third, a deeper look into evolution from the third floor down. In chapter 16 of Comp MS Tony Bennett discusses the organization of a museum space as it pertains to the visitor. “It could only be made visible by displaying –side by side- forms of life, or artifacts, that both resembled each other and yet were also different, and to do so in a manner that suggested that those differences had resulted from the passage of time.” Pg 270. 

The Grande Galerie de l’Evoltion although dealing with a similar topic of evolution but displayed in a completely different manner. All of the animals are taxidermy so that they feel like there is life in each animal. The space is grand almost like it could be used for other purposes, and not just a museum. There are interactive lights, technology, and the museum tackles not only evolution, but pollution, extinction, and contemporary topics. Ex what are animal furs used for nowadays? Most of the displays are open in the air and are not sealed off in cabinets. The display strategies used are meant so that children and adults can engage with the objects, by learning, reading, and getting up close. 

Science is present in both museums; however it is not made to be obvious. You are looking at evolution and scientific topics, but to get into the science of the displays you have to look closely at the objects and understand the history. An example would be in the Grand Galerie on the third floor there are three miniature scenes that show the evolution of the city of Paris, and how it went from being green lush woodland to a bustling city over the past couple of centuries. It then goes into the science of how human kind has developed to create what we need, instead of keeping what we should. 

For science museums it is important that they have these public exhibition spaces. Unlike art which in part is put to just look and admire. Science is there to teach, and by having these giant spaces they are able to engage audiences, and help them understand such theories of evolution by showing them. Tony Bennett explains this with the first examples of the evolutionary museum.  “ This was, then, a developmental order which enjoined the ‘evolutionary showmen,’ who aimed to translate the principals of Darwinism into museum displays, to do so in ways that would make the lessons of evolution, and the political conclusions to be drawn from those lessons, readily perceptible.” Pg 269.  

When walking into either of these museums, you feel as if time has come to a stand-still. There is something sad about the objects stagnant in their positions, knowing that they had once been alive and free. By putting objects in chronological order that is the most obvious way of displaying time, another which is what the Grande Gallerie did is putting them into sections. For example the gallery of extinction, the visitor then understands they are walking into different parts of time. Each has constructed its own world, and its own vision. The Anatomy museum presented the feeling of an old world that once existed and you were part of a piece of history, the building was much like a warehouse with iron bars on the ceiling and old wooden floors. However, the Grande Gallerie gave a modern flair to an old subject, by making the building huge with glass elevators and marble floors. That created a feeling of time travel that enraptured the visitor. 

I find it is important to have science museums to help teach society about such topics. They are a major aid in our understanding of where we have come from. Plus there are just good fun.

Islamic Arts Galleries

 Islamic Arts Galleries

The Louvre in itself is considered a symbol of power. It is a structure that not only represents Paris, but can also be considered a symbol of France. Throughout the years as a palace and a historical art museum, its content has been admired by many, and it is generally though that every piece of content within the museum has a purpose. The feeling of national pride is noticed from the entrance way with the grand lobby and general feeling of wealth within the museum. “Where national identity and enthusiasm are associated within the state are high among individuals and diverse groups, patriotism and nationalism are likely to be supported and deeply felt.” Pg. 153, Comp MS 

The Louvre was able to transition from a sovereign power and neutralizes itself for public use. As stated in our class visit gone are the names of Kings that decorate the walls, but instead they are replaced with famous French artists from the last couple of centuries. However, in saying that the power has shifted, there is still a feeling that you are in a political building. The amount of artwork collected by the Louvre on display and in storage amasses to millions and with that you feel that you are in a sacred space. For this is not just any regular museum. 

This feeling of scared space pertains to the newly opened Islamic Arts galleries. The galleries are located on the ground floor of the Louvre and extend even further underground. Upon entering the gallery the viewer walks through a dark portal and is brought into a room that is similar to a tent in the desert. The tents texture is knitted and gold, and it moves like the ocean. It truly feels like you are being transported into a different world. I should note that also upon entering there is a giant sign that states that the show was presided over by President Francois Holland. (Could this be subliminal messaging?)  The material used for the ground is dark with pieces of metallic in it. To give off this Arabian night feeling, however in saying this, the actual exhibit is extremely quiet. Only the slight hum of visitors talking creates the mood. The design of the exhibit is quite odd. Upstairs everything is on a slant and there doesn’t seem to be much order. Downstairs almost takes your breath away for there is so much content, which I later found out could not be show upstairs because the light would damage the pieces. Everything seems to be in sections. There is a section for rugs, a section for stained windows, and even a section for multimedia where you can sit and watch films. The exhibit as large as it was, felt quit somber, and when you looked around at the type of clientele who were visiting it was the older generation of Parisians. It felt like an exhibition for old people. 

Referring back to the entrance way with Francois Holland’s sign of endorsement, perhaps this is exactly what the curators and contributors wanted this exhibition to be. A somber reflection of the beauties and quiet qualities that each of the Islamic countries have to offer. As mentioned briefly on pg. 165, Comp MS. Flora Edouwaye S. Kaplan talks about the use of storage in a museum. What artifacts are put on display, and what artifacts are put in storage. This could be the reason why this exhibit is being shown now instead of in previous years. As a political message to bridge the gap between the Islamic countries and France, and show support for mass amount of Islamic people who are now living not only in Paris, but in France. (BBC) 

It is actually quite amazing the amount of support that was given to this exhibit and that is seen through the small, but noticeable plaques that state who the donors are. The Islamic Arts galleries bring together not only one but almost all Muslim cultures but, are able to teach the public about the different types of artifacts present such as poetry, and ancient deities. As a note on the use of interactive technology the spoken word on the ground floor, gave viewers an insight into how these pieces of art are conveyed to the public.  

 In chapter 12 of Comp MS Rosmarie Beier-de Haan says “What we see emerging is a world society characterized by everything that distinguishes people religious cultural and political differences- being presented in a single location, a single city, and increasingly even within a single family or life story.” Pg. 188 That is what I felt this exhibition was. Although if I was asked with that political message was within the context of the art I am unsure, although I know it is there. From an outside view it is obvious that the political message was the support and endorsement of France and Islam coming together to teach and appreciate their cultures in one of the most prevalent cultural museums in the world. 

My overall reactions to the exhibit was that it is definitely worth seeing, however failed to grab my attention with the most of the multimedia and subject matter. The space is visually beautiful, but I am not sure how must I really learned about the content. Yet, I should probably go back and have another look.

 Work Cited

Macdonald, Sharon. A Companion to Museum Studies. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2006. Print.

 "Muslims in Europe: Country Guide." BBC News. BBC, 23 Dec. 2005. Web. 08 Oct. 2012. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4385768.stm>.

Impressions from the Fragonard

Well lets just say that after my visit to the Musee Fragonard I do not see verternairan school, nor anything to do with becoming a doctor happening for me in the near future. I would have to agree with my Professor, that it was one of the strangest museums I have ever been too. Not only for its content, but also for the way it was structured. Starting with the entrance way the museum was located in a grand building that was constructed I believe the guide said sometime around the 1700's. It was very classically french and had a Louvre esque sort of feeling to it.

The size of the space was actually quite small, but packed with content. Which ranged from skeltons to flesh eating viruses...delightful. The large cabinets in which the specimens were held complimented the space and sort of provided more room for different objects to be held. Without them, I personally feel that the viewer could have gotten lost in the room. There would have been too many things to look at and it would feel more like walking through a garage sale instead of one of Paris's oldest museums.

This museum is difficult to understand from just one visit. Hard to believe, but some of the original uses for these bizzare objects were for curiosity cabinets. These were cabinets that the aristocatic, and rich kept to amuse their guests and family members. The transformation from narrative to history and science is a complicated transition. For some objects they can be seen as pure science or history, but for most there is such a detailed history behind them, that going through the museum once you will never get the full understanding of all the stories. This is also true for the actual school, and historical building that the musueum is found it.

It is an unusual space, and an unusual museum. However, I do recommend giving it a try and seeing if your stomach can handle it.