Monet and the Impressionists

[marioc]

I thought it was pretty neat,not usually my cup of tea either.
The F1 exhibition however vrmmmmm

[slofox]

If you really want to be blown away by Impressionist paintings, try the Musee d'Orsay in Paris...even a gormless dork like myself can be impressed by that place...

[3L4NS1R]

I just thought that after queuing for nearly an hour it wasn't as impressive as I was expecting it to be.

Agreed.

I was ecstatic to hear it was coming to NZ, and full kudos to Te Papa for bringing the big artists here. It's always a struggle for NZ galleries to get any works of decent size here, so to get any Monet works is an impressive act

BUT.

It was one of the worst laid out exhibition I've been to for a while. It had no flow, after walking down one isle, I had no clue where to go next. Exhibitions shouldn't do that to you, it should flow nicely, with a logical progression and allow you to immerse yourself in the art itself.

Compare that to the 'Holbein to Hockney' exhibition a few years ago. That was a beautiful example of a chronologically organised exhibition that took you on a journey.

[vifferman]

If you really want to be blown away by Impressionist paintings, try the Musee d'Orsay in Paris...even a gormless dork like myself can be impressed by that place...

Thanks for that.
I'll check it out next year.

[klingon]

Monet's perception of light seems to be down to his cataracts.

It's interesting to compare his early work with his late stuff with an opthamologist to hand.

I was just having this very discussion with an elderly friend the other day! At the age of 83 she has cataracts and her daughters have been teasing her about her changed perception of colour. She started knitting one of her grandkids a cardigan - at night she thought she was using pink wool then in the morning she discovered it was yellow!

The poor old dear was getting a bit distressed about this so I had a chat with her over a cuppa about Monet and how his colour perception changed over time, and how some of his most famous and popular paintings were affected by his cataracts.

Now when her kids tease her she can explain how she and other great artists share a special way of seeing colour.

http://archopht.ama-assn.org/cgi/rep...24/12/1764.pdf

[Beemer]

...BUT.

It was one of the worst laid out exhibition I've been to for a while. It had no flow, after walking down one isle, I had no clue where to go next. Exhibitions shouldn't do that to you, it should flow nicely, with a logical progression and allow you to immerse yourself in the art itself...

Totally agree. We had to queue for an hour, meaning we had just an hour to view the exhibition before our two hour parking ran out. The place was crowded and we found it quite confusing to wander around. I expected it to be laid out in some logical progression from the earlier works to the later, or have all the works of one artist grouped together. There was no handout explaining the works or how best to view them - and when I foolishly tried writing - in pen!!! - on the pathetic little brochure the names of the paintings I liked so I could discuss them with a friend who had also seen the exhibition, the Nazi security guard (female, but with a real attitude problem) told me they "preferred pencil". How pathetic! There was a guided talk going on at the time (we didn't have time to follow it due to the hour spent queuing) so we had to wait to see some paintings and when the other half wanted to walk around the edge of the group, another (also female, what was it with them?) guard stood there with her arms outstretched and told him to "go around the wall, you can't walk here" - he was about to walk over the last two or three inches of the tape on the floor indicating you should stay behind it!

Some of the paintings were absolutely stunning, like the haystacks and the meadow of flowers, and also the Degas of the racehorses (my favourite) and one of 'fashionable people on the beach' - can't remember who it was by as the Nazi wouldn't let me record it! I didn't like the cathedral because of course we viewed it relatively closely - if a handout had been provided which told you the best distance for viewing, it may have made a difference as several people have told me it was their favourite. The walls in the middle were annoying as I often couldn't get far enough away to view a painting properly.

All in all, I was a bit disappointed. Contrast that with seeing The Queen's Pictures at the old museum many years ago - the paintings were HUGE and some were at the end of long corridors so their full effect was gained. I can still remember some of those paintings but not many from the Monet exhibition I saw earlier this month.

[Okey Dokey]

Yes, Beemer, I thought that Degas was neat, too. I paid for the audio tour, which was helpful, but mostly I relied on my swotting up knowledge. I'm lucky I planned that bit of reading/research, because it helped me find my way around. It was strangely laid out.

[Okey Dokey]

If you really want to be blown away by Impressionist paintings, try the Musee d'Orsay in Paris...even a gormless dork like myself can be impressed by that place...

Yes, if I ever get to Paris that is on my "must-see" list!

[slofox]

Yes, if I ever get to Paris that is on my "must-see" list!

The restaurant in there is pretty "must-eat" as well...kinda pricey though...

[Monamie]

If you really want to be blown away by Impressionist paintings, try the Musee d'Orsay in Paris...even a gormless dork like myself can be impressed by that place...

I was lucky enough to see some of the Masters paintings on my OE...many years ago, in the Muse'e du Louve. Totally amazing I saw the Monet exhibition when it was here in about 89'.
My Dad trained the London School of Art so had the joy of growing up on the smell of oil paints