At the end of December, I went to see an exhibition at what is calling itself the Harvard Art Museums, although it was only one of them. I'm a little confused but don't care what they call themselves
https://harvardartmuseums.org/exhibitions/6465/sketch-shade-smudge-drawing-from-gray-to-blackThere was a lot of technical information about what one can do with different black things (pencil, crayon, charcoal) on different kinds of paper. I learned some stuff. Based on some of the displays and things I saw in other parts of the museum, I started to wonder whether the museum was originally put together as a teaching aid for Harvard students. The placards throughout are very informative and in some cases thought-provoking.
Also there is some amazing stuff on the walls. Harvard has a lot of wealthy donors.
The Boston Museum of Fine Arts has had an exhibit featuring Winslow Homer's work.
https://www.mfa.org/exhibition/of-light-and-air-winslow-homer-in-watercolor I kept putting off going because it meant looking up my member password to book the timed ticket (really). I had heard from other people how crowded it was and knew from experience that weekends would probably be the worst, so I went yesterday. My Mondays are back to being goofy - my volunteer shift ends at 1 PM (in Boston) and my Korean class doesn't start until 6 PM. It's not always the case that I want to spend the afternoon in a library. It seemed like the ideal time to see the exhibit. It was *still* very crowded, even though there are timed tickets. It is the last week, though, so maybe it was full of procrastinators. I previously would only have been able to recognize the most famous paintings (two boys in a field, guys in boats, ladies at the edge of a cliff over a beach). I was intrigued at the work he did for Harpers Weekly, covering the Civil War. Like the exhibit at Harvard, there was a case of his materials, with discussions throughout about the paper choices. I didn't lean in as closely as some people, but I think some of the paintings were just as is, with no glass. I really wanted to touch the paper. I did not do so.
I took a lot of photos. The one I like best is not something I feel that I can post here, because it is of a fellow art-looker, whose permission I did not ask. There was a fake boat with paddle and a suitably scaled wall background so that someone could sit and try to look like one of the paintings we had seen. It was very well organized and included a spot on the floor where the amateur photographer was supposed to stand to take the picture. The subject in question was posing fairly patiently while his companion fumbled with her phone. I took his picture.
While I was downstairs in the museum anyway, I went to see an exhibit of 20-21st century quilts made in China.
https://www.mfa.org/exhibition/one-hundred-stitches-one-hundred-villagesSome of them included information about the makers, some were anonymous but presumed to be made by women. A passerby said "they don't look Chinese." By that did she mean they could have been patchwork quilts from other parts of the world? I guess so. As the blurb linked above says
>>Though viewers familiar with American quilt patterns may be surprised to notice many similar designs, these Chinese works represent a tradition all their own.<<
As I got ready to take a picture of a quilt I realized that looking at it through the camera and looking at it with bare eyes gave me a very different view. I was startled. I tried looking in different ways. I called over some passersby to see if they saw the same discrepancy. Yes. In the photo, the white parts pop so much that the cross shape really jumps out at one. Just looking at it, they don't seem any more prominent than the other shapes. Is the camera doing something? Is my eye/brain perception smoothing things to make more of a gestalt?
I saw some other stuff as well, and then left, but I wasn't done with art. On the way from the MFA to class I decided to detour slightly so that I could get a burrito from the 300 year old Chipotle on the Freedom Trail (that's a joke. The basic building is from 1718 but the Chipotle hasn't been there that long)
https://npplan.com/parks-by-state/massachusetts-national-parks/boston-national-historical-park-park-at-a-glance/boston-national-historical-park-freedom-trail/boston-national-historical-park-historic-sites/boston-national-historical-park-old-corner-bookstore/There is some new public art in a couple of places near there.
And I had interacted with some art of a different sort before I even went to the museum. I walk down Charles Street nearly every Sunday and had been looking in a shop window for a long time. On a Monday afternoon it was open and I went in. It's called December Thieves and has small quantity independent designer garments from around the world. I asked a lot of questions. I didn't buy anything. The garment I found most intriguing but also kind of befuddling is this coat, which is short in the back and long in the front, and has some raw edges. If a small-run item is a work of art, would I be defacing it by hemming the bottom or flat-felling the seams? It doesn't matter - the only one they have left seems to be the one in the window, which the website says is an XS.
https://decemberthieves.com/products/la-vaca-loca-sueno-asymmetric-layered-wool-blend-jacketIt's nearly $700. I don't know what a sensible price would be, but I hope the sewist was well paid.
I've been thinking about an exhibit that is supposed to be at the SFMOMA in October+.
https://www.sfmoma.org/press-release/sfmoma-announces-2026-exhibitions-including-transformed-fisher-collection-galleries-matisses-femme-au-chapeau-and-rm-x-sfmoma/ $700 could cover a good bit of the cost of going to see it. That seems like a ridiculous trip idea, but it keeps being evident that standing right in front of a work of art is not like looking at it in a book or online.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
