The Guggenheim Museum is unlike most art museums in that it mainly features only a few exhibits at a time. The exhibits on display when I went were arranged in a very unique way. The Guggenheim calls it theanyspacewhatever exhibit. Basically the different artists have all of their work intertwined by basically having them all adjacent to one another. Within this exhibit were a collection of different art styles that were distributed sparsely throughout the interior of the museum. In the other parts of the museum that were not in the atrium was where the somewhat conventional art was. Cathrine Opie had two different spaces for her photography and there was the Thannjauser Collection and the Kandinsky Gallery. The layout of this museum was really the most interesting thing at the museum. While the art itself was okay the overall layout raised the biggest questions to me. Is it better to have less art or more?
The Guggenheim Museum is housed in a very unique building and presents its works in a unique way. With this unique building the curators have a lot of space to work with for the exhibits. The majority of the building seemed to be empty. Not in the sense that there weren’t many people in the museum but in that the works were few and far in between. There is a surprisingly large amount of underutilized space and it appears to be a conscious decision on the museum’s part. For the most part this execution fails to entertain. The overall impression of the Guggenheim museum and its exhibits was that I was walking through a sparsely decorated hallway. I found myself disconnected with any of the work that I seemed to just pass by. The lone work of note was by Jorge Pardo. His work “Sculpture Ink” seemed to capitalize on the overall design of the exhibit. Pardo created many different faux walls that created a winding hallway in the hallway itself. The walls were made out of cardboard and had holes cut in them. The holes however did not allow you to see through the walls because they were double sided. On the walls are a few framed works and a bunch of weirdly shaped lights. The simple pleasure taken from this work was because of its annoyingly impractical nature. As I walked through the faux hallway I enjoyed the aggravated looks of the other patrons who simply didn’t want to do extra navigating.
While I feel that the presentation of the works was an overall failure I believe that it isn’t the kind of layout intended for me. The layout is less about the volume of work and more about the connection you make with it. While for the most part I simply walk through museums and look at works quickly to see if anything hits me, that may not be the best way to enjoy the Guggenheim. The sparsity of works almost requires you to force a connection with the works. It forces you to slow down and really look at the works otherwise you will be done with the museum in less than 45 minutes. I did see many people enthralled by each and every work. The only thing was I couldn’t determine if they were truly enjoying themselves or just trying to get their moneys worth.
The Guggenheim appears to be an art museum for people who can’t stand art museums. It’s conscious decision to forgo the large galleries filled with countless works is a bold choice considering how jarring the experience feels in comparison. Personally I prefer the large amount of works that you can skim until you are hit with something you personally really enjoy as opposed to the here is what we have appreciate approach the Guggenheim has. It is difficult to say wether I would feel the same way if there were more works that resonated with me in the Guggenheim. However, I doubt it.