Takashi Murakami, speaking at the Brooklyn Museum’s press preview today. Director Arnold Lehman listens.
Sorry I’ve been away all day, art-lings, but I’ve been prowling the Murakami press preview at the Brooklyn Museum, on which I’ll be commenting soon (if all goes according to plan) on New York Public Radio (WNYC). I think I’ll save my first (mostly favorable) takes on the art and the installation for my audio analysis. (As always, I’ll post that on CultureGrrl, when available.)
I do have a somewhat broader (if not broadminded) perspective on the show, since I saw the very different installation at the organizing venue—the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art’s Geffen Contemporary. Let me just say, for now, that one of my favorite aspects of the Brooklyn version is the site-specific part—the murals that Murakami created expressly for the stairway joining the two parts of the show, on the fourth and fifth floor:
But in my continuing Vuitton vendetta, let me quote, without comment (because I think none is necessary) remarks made today to justify the museum presence of the for-profit, externally run boutique.
Murakami (talking to reporters in the galleries): I cannot understand it. We can enjoy the MoMA store, so why not this [the Louis Vuitton boutique]?
Lehman (at the press conference): The permanent collection galleries of our museum are filled with objects that you could buy in retail stores—such as Herman Miller furniture and Tiffany silver—which represent the highest aesthetic achievements of their particular historic periods. [Their status as retail products] does not diminish their aesthetic power….The same is true of Takashi’s designs.
But Arnold, why did you avoid calling on me at the beginning of the question period, even though mine was the only hand raised and your trustee, sitting onstage, even pointed me out to you?
Could it have been because of this? Or maybe Lehman knew I would inquire whether he saw any distinction between works from the museum’s permanent collection and works for sale, in a privately run store at a nonprofit institution, from the inventory of a commercial luxury goods conglomerate.
Speaking of fashion, today I witnessed a press-preview first—two “celebrity stylists” who kept shadowing the artist, spraying and smoothing his coif:
“Hairspray,” the exhibition
Do you think George Clooney will have groomers at the Metropolitan Museum’s Costume Institute benefit? (Harold, I still haven’t gotten my invitation!) Why didn’t I engage one of these people for my bad-hair day at the Athens International Conference last month? Good thing I asked for their card.