Happy In Bag

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Modern Love














I've spouted countless absurd opinions at Happy In Bag, but this might be the most unlikely statement ever made in this space- I prefer the Kemper Museum of Contemporary Art to London's Tate Modern. Maybe it's just my disappointment at discovering that the Tate displays a meager collection of Francis Bacon, my favorite 20th century painter, but my recent visit to the gargantuan British institution left me cold. Even though the Tate must be well over a hundred times larger than the Kemper, it's less welcoming and more pretentious than its Kansas City equivalent.

4 Comments:

  • At 5:08 PM, Blogger meesha.v said…

    Who needs a giant museum,unless you live next to it and go there all the time.

     
  • At 11:22 PM, Blogger emawkc said…

    Still, I'd love to visit the Rothko collection they have there.

     
  • At 6:02 AM, Blogger Eolaí gan Fhéile said…

    So much of the impression the Tate Modern leaves on you is down to whatever installation is in the Turbine Hall at the time - its magnificent space constituting half of the building.

    Before the creation of the Tate Modern I remember the 20th century stuff at the old Tate - now rebranded Tate Britain - and the huge impression it made on me - more than my first visit to the MOMA, and yes more than any visit to the Tate Modern.

    The Tate Modern is so big it is mesmerising at times, so I treat it as a collection of different museums, of digestible size - like the Seagram Rothkos that emawkc mentions.

    I've no desire to talk down the Kemper, but I do find the Tate Modern not at all pretentious - especially with the current hang.

    You should head to Dublin and see Bacon's reassembled studio.

     
  • At 2:16 PM, Blogger Happy In Bag said…

    Thanks for the tip, Irish.

    Your mention of Rothko allows me to break out the old saw, Emaw- "I could do that."

    I "think" you're on my side, Meesha, but I'm not clever enough to know for certain.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home