Where did Steve spend his Saturday? Why he was here. Bright shiny and sparkly things filled the new gallery. And as with every trip to the Cleveland Museum, I learned something. Sometimes it's how appallingly ignorant the art historians are once they get out of their area of expertise (there was a Hercules Heracles incident and the need to correct the impression of little chil'en who were being taught wrong - hint, before the "arrival" of Zeus in the Hellenistic Period it was Heracles who was Hera's consort/champion/child, the name meaning "Glory of Hera" - yeah, I know way too much sometimes- and a Buddhist philosophy moment where I just smiled and let it pass).
This time, however, I found out that I really like the jewelry of René Lalique. I knew Lalique from his glasswork, which was later in his life, and was not exceptionally impressed (and this exhibit has many examples, however they also had some of the boxes his glassware bottle came in and they were fabulous). I knew it was Lalique who created the term Art Nouveau (after his shop in Paris - again, too much knowledge sometimes), but I had never seen his jewelry (google image search) that he created at the beginning of his career. They were amazing, even more so if you know that he didn't come from an artistic family, unlike Tiffany, Cartier and Fabergé, his contemporaries and competitors. There was a bat neckless (wow), a broach with an ivory nymph with batlike jeweled wings (holy crap), and a hair comb made of horn carved into the likeness of two swallows nesting with a gold twig and ruby (I think) berries (fabulous). He also not only did clasps and broaches in the shape of exquisite butterflies, like the rest of them, but also moths and cicadas. And did I mention the purse which had clasps shaped like open mouthed snakeheads? Big ones too.
Other show highlight include aluminum as a precious metal (used to lighten a headpiece), a Cartier knock-off of a Fabergé egg given to the Tsar as a gift from Paris that had a carved aquamarine stone in the shape of a pillow including the requisit sags and depressions to hold the egg on a pedestal, and some amazing "incomplete" pieces (junk left over in their shops at the time of their deaths). Also finding out that, yes, they did use some machines in their work, especially to help with repetitive tasks (like engravings equally space to be enameled).
So, a fun (but expensive) time was had. Hope your Saturdays were just as good.
7 comments:
You definitely had the better Saturday. Looks like it was great fun.
Let me get this straight- I'm out shoveling snow all weekend alternating with moments of hot cocoa and reading the Pali's Buddhist Suttas with a cat perched on my shoulder- and you're out having fun at the Cleveland Museum. Go figure.
By the way, Friday night I was reading some of Zizek's works, where he described Buddhism as a supplementary fetish adopted and promoted by capitalists to reduce stress so that workers can be further exploited.
He's not much loved in Marxist's circles, as he is kicking back against the Buddhist focus on the individual, which he feels is undermining Marx's emphasis on the working class as a group.
I don't know if you're familiar with his work, but he's as much a rabble rouser as Marx and Rand. Rabble rousers are sometimes more fun to read in between shoveling snow!
Vince, it was certainly fun, except for he crowds (it was very packed, although that's good for the museum).
Rick, well, we had to shovel today if that makes you feel better. My driveway is two cars wide and a little over fifty feet long. We use shovels.
I'm unfamiliar with Zizek, but the idea of religion being a product of the rich to control the masses is an old one. And one embraced by Marx himself. The only thing I could see as rubbing the Marxists the wrong way would be that the concept of the Modern Man is not dissimilar to (some concepts of) enlightenment and some philosophies of the Buddha match into their ideals (individual improvement for societal gain, seeking betterment selflessly, finishing all things without effort by accepting work as part of life).
I'm with you on the idea, Steve, but that wasn't what was so interesting.
The interesting twist was the serious, ungoing discussion among certain Marxist thinkers like Ziaek as to whether or not Buddhism should be classed as a religion in that regard, if you see what I mean. Marx's own writings on the topic are almost non-existent. Engel's are equally spotty, which has left the field wide open to some rather opinionated, interesting thinkers. However, since Buddhism is hardly known for homogeneity, it complicates the discussion tremendously.
I might be in Florida this weekend instead of at the convention, where I was hoping to ask you your opinions on the writings of a few of these modern day Marxists in their struggle to classify Buddhism.
I'm using Marx in a novel and am enjoying the work tremendously, including his alleged affiliations with the Freemasons. As a Freemason myself, I don't think this is at all likely, but you'd be surprised how many conspiracy kooks out their like to mix and match their conspiracy allegations!
Anyway, if I miss you this coming convention, I hope to see you at the next!
Rick, if I had the choice between Florida and Detroit in the middle of January, I know what I would pick. And that would be the oranges off the trees.
I have a feeling you're better read on communistic theory than I am, not knowing my Marx for my Engles. I'm a little better at the difference between Leninism and Stalinism and probably, if you put my feet to the fire, pick out the Trotsky in their midst, but more than that and I'm out of my pay grade.
As for Marx being a Freemason, that's an interesting conspiracy theory. Other than an attempt to continue to vilify the Freemasonry Movement and taint Marxism, I doubt very much Marx himself would be interested in their philosophies (having their historical start with open commerce). Although I could see their guild interest in the superiority/freedom of the worker (as compared to the serf) might interest him. Not much else tracks.
His jewelry is VERY cool. I just did some enamel work - pretty much at the kindergarten level compared to the kind of beautiful art he's turning out - and the amount of skill and care that went into producing those pieces is huge, it's a challenging and time consuming jewelry technique.
Jerimrl, just remember he had years of experience, highly skilled assistants, a full workshop, and the competition to keep on top. As well as the time that the rest of us spend working other jobs.
Post a Comment