LACMA trip review

Ellsworth Kelly

I saw shapes.  I saw shapes in different bold colors.  I saw shapes that sometimes curved, sometimes subtly ballooned in the middle.  Sometimes they even lacked hue.  Most of these shapes on carefully placed white canvases were very large, imposing on their white walls and on my eyes.  I took steps forward and backwards, scaling the pieces.  Looked closely at their textures.  Then tried to see them as a whole.  Saw tried and true combinations of orange and blue, dominant hue trickery, etc.

In all, the Ellsworth Kelly collection was unremarkable, though vibrant and large.  I don't know what possessed the museum or anyone to have collected these beyond their aesthetic value (they are "pretty" as it were).  So, attempting to understand this beyond "I get it.  It's pretty," in an effort to avoid what Pen of "Pen and Teller" calls uninformed criticism ("you didn't touch it, so you can't critique it") I read through the various texts that accompanied these large, clean cut paintings (well most of them, besides the experimentations that he committed to.)  After reading through the related pamphlet to the gallery, it all just seemed like one man's "restating" of his other work in other mediums (would have sort of liked to see that . . . at least photos) done in the incredibly hard medium of lithography that requires razor sharp precision.  Richard H. Axsom says that Kelly has his "own distinctive voice."

This voice is not distinctive.  At least from the collection I've seen, these feel too familiar, too much of "I've seen this before" if we're talking about a distinctive voice.  They are, at best, abstract color studies exploded large.  They are pretty, and I could understand some several reasons why an artist would be compelled to do these things (admittedly, such exercises, when I do them, are 'different' from the more concrete/representational illustration I expect myself to be capable of).  They can make a room feel adorned, or at least "high class," but there seems to be nothing beyond the aesthetic value of these pieces.  Maybe some observations on some subtle use of curves, or how Kelly played with dominance and careful composition beyond the bounds of the piece.  They just seem  . . . pretty.  Bravo to his efforts to master lithography, with the clean lines he's been able to generate along with the subtle curves.  Once again, applause for the effort, not the product.  I wonder, sometimes, what plants or natural objects did he find to base his basic shapes on, besides the shadows objects produced.

The most interesting piece in the whole gallery happened to be his representations of the major Rivers of the world.  It was interesting what a series of texture black lines on white canvas could simulate.  But that was it.  Just interesting.

Modern Living

Sparse but futuristic design.  That's the best way to sum up the pieces of historical consumer design products on display.  A clear example would be the trailer, which on the outside is literally a hollow sheet metal shell.  Most of the art show was just displaying how consumers drove design, including the consumer's vision of what could/should be the design of their products.  Modular homes, geometric/sharp furniture, overall simple design for everyday objects,  Nothing elaborate, and heck, even forcing wood to look angular.

It was good visual reference for Jetsons' era art if I ever need to refer to it.  Felt like this all needed to be in a history museum as opposed to an art museum, though.

There were some fascinating tiny metal "sculptures" near the white car in the back.  They held my attention for some seconds.  Gotta remember to perhaps collage designs like that when I need industrial "greeble" in future products.