I was looking for Performance 4: Roman Ondak, above, which MoMA tucked away on the 2nd floor without telling any of the staff, but instead was struck by another opening. Beijing-based Conceptual artist Song Dong has taken over the atrium of MoMA with a sprawl of things. Things is the best word I have for the old furniture, shopping bags, stuffed animals, plastic containers, etc. that cover most of the floor.
(Note: I’ve always held a steely reserve against conceptual art; for an artist to focus on the idea behind the work above the physical form it takes strips away the very essence of the visual arts. It’s like visual philosophy that downplays the visual…but I digress…)
I was talking about Song Dong at MoMA. So my first thought on seeing the new atrium?
See what I mean?
Song Dong’s objects, above left, are smaller and more plentiful, but you can see the same line of chairs and carefully ordered lines of ready made furniture in both her piece and Kippenberger’s piece, above right. Both look like they had fallen out of an especially providential hurricane–the human hand and organizing principle behind them are removed enough to render them obtuse if you don’t know the story behind them. (In Kippenberger’s case, perhaps even if you do.)
Except while Kippenberger’s amalgamation left me coldly bemused, I found this ragtag assortment of anything and everything old and worn rather moving. Even poetic in its row upon row shoes. It reminded me of New York City streets. Kippenberger’s The Happy End of Franz Kafka’s ‘Amerika’ seems shiny and calculated in comparison.
So perhaps Conceptual art can have visual integrity and I’ll have to revise my opinion. Perhaps. If you have the chance to see it, I’d love to know what your reaction was.