Tags
Two weeks ago for Bookman’s birthday we were going to go see the special Rembrandt exhibition at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts. We were not surprised that we needed tickets for the special exhibit at the usually free museum – we’ve been there for other ticketed special exhibits like Georgia O’Keefe. What surprised us was that we had to get the tickets in advance. You see, the exhibit hasn’t been advertised much and it had been here for almost a month before we found out about it. Not until last week or thereabouts have I begun seeing ads for the show in various places around the city. Needless to say, we did not get to go for Bookman’s birthday, tickets were sold out.
But we were not to be defeated. Lesson learned, we planned ahead. Each got today off work, and we bought tickets for a 10 a.m. (opening time) a full week in advance. We arrived a little before 10 and they were already allowing people in. Yay!
The exhibition was set up in a series of linked gallery rooms in a sort of chronological order always beginning to the right of the entry door. But by creating an order, everyone entering the exhibit bunches up in a crowd trying to see the two tiny early paintings. Neither Bookman nor I are tall people and jostling for position to get close enough to read the plaque telling about the paintings was not possible in the scrum. So we bucked the order and went left where there was no one looking at that painting. We didn’t end up getting to see the small early paintings until the very end when we were walking out. But this ended up being okay and very interesting after seeing all the brilliant and mature work to then see how he began. In these two pieces by eighteen-year-old Rembrandt we could see the elements of what he was going to become. If we had seen them first we would not have been able to see that.
Amongst the authentic Rembrandts were many paintings that had once been attributed to him but have since been attributed to other artists in his workshop. There were also several paintings signed by Rembrandt that had been begun by his workshop lackeys and finished by him. Having the chance to see these paintings alongside “real” Rembrandts was fascinating. At first it was hard to tell the difference but gradually it became easier to see what was Rembrandt and what was Rembrandt-like and why.
My favorite painting in the show was Minerva in Her Study. Minerva was modeled by Rembrandt’s wife Saskia and the info plaque described the painting as his “love letter” to her. This painting was so amazing, the quality of the light, the detail, the composition. Love in paint. Sadly, Saskia died in 1642 probably from tuberculosis. During her illness they hired Geertje Dircx to care for and nurse their infant son Titus. Even before Saskia died, Rembrandt and Geertje became lovers. Poor Saskia.
As much as I loved the experience, there were a couple of downsides for me. There seemed to be a large number of mostly elderly people wearing very strong perfume and cologne. I am allergic to most perfumes and one man’s cologne especially nearly sent me into a panic because I suddenly couldn’t breathe. When I left the exhibition I had a headache and was slightly nauseous – my personal sacrifice to art. There were also audio tours available to rent that tell you about the paintings. Audio tours have been the worst thing to happen to art in recent years. People wearing headphones are oblivious to their surroundings. They also have the bad habit of standing in front of the info plaques and reading them while their audio tour is giving them the same information.
While my fellow visitors were annoying, the worst part about the exhibit was the lighting. Rembrandt’s paintings tend to be dark and varnished. The museum had spot lights on the ceiling shining on the paintings in addition to regular room lighting. The spots made the worst glare that blotted out half the painting when I stood directly in front. No matter how far back I stood, there would still be glare. Often, to see the whole piece without glare, Bookman and I had to stand off to the side of the painting.
The lighting was disappointing and my fellow visitors often annoying but I wouldn’t have missed it for anything. The exhibit was made up of works in collections in the United States and is the largest Rembrandt exhibit assembled in the U.S. ever. I am very lucky to have seen it and thank you Minneapolis Institute of Arts for putting it together. We will be returning to the MIA in winter for another special exhibition, they are going to have the terracotta warriors there!
Lucky you. The exhibition of Rembrandt’s paintings is only on tour in three cities, yours and previously in North Carolina and Cleveland.
Richard, yes, indeed, I am very lucky. We get major exhibitions here but something this huge usually ends up in Chicago. I’m glad that this time we got it and they didn’t
Neither did Portland or Honolulu.
Richard, Portland isn’t important and Honolulu, ends of the earth and all that
Despite that being a kind of grumpy review, I will still accept your accolades for being the one to inform you about the exhibit. And me not even being anywhere near Minnesota! See how well I look out for you?
Cindy my sister, I would have found out about it eventually but thanks to you I found out about it sooner rather than later.
What a shame the curators hadn’t thought through the lighting issue more carefully. We had a wonderful da Vinci exhibition in London over last winter and although travelling is very difficult for me I blocked out several days after to recover and went down for it. I had the same problem with crowds as you did, so decided that I would focus on just the large paintings which would never reproduce in all their splendour and leave the drawings, which I thought I would be able to enjoy via the catalogue later. (That was before I discovered the price of the catalogue – far more than the ticket had cost!) That worked for me and I have to say that the lighting was fine. Later, in Birmingham, there was a much smaller exhibition of about a dozen of the drawings from the Queen’s collection. It was free and I was able to pick my time and enjoy them without crowds. That was wonderful.
Alex, the lighting issue was unfortunate but even having to look at the paintings from the side or with glare on them, they were still phenomenal. I can imagine how amazing that da Vinci exhibition must have been! Well worth the travel and the frustrating crowds. And those catalogues are expensive aren’t they?! It’s extortion! I didn’t even bother looking at the price for the Rembrandt one because I knew I was not going to pay it and it would only be exasperating. The small drawing exhibition you got to see later must have been quite enjoyable.
Had been thinking about your outing yesterday, sorry to read the lighting was so bad, it being so important with these paintings and glad you wouldn’t have missed it. I read Minerva was sold (relatively speaking) not so long ago, in 2002, it being a major piece at the Maastricht (The Netherlands) Art Fair. I couldn’t find though which museum acquired it.
Cath, I can imagine how difficult it must be to light the paintings and if they had hung them so they were slightly tilted out from the wall the problem would have been solved. However for the large ones I imagine that would be a huge challenge because of their weight. Still, I am so glad to have seen them. They had the provenance of all the paintings on the info plaques but it all blurred together after a while so I don’t recall who owns Minerva. Whoever it is is very lucky!
We’ve had lighting issues at the Art Institute of Chicago, too. Drives me BONKERS. Wrote about them at bit here:
http://mentalmultivitamin.blogspot.com/2009/11/fine-art-friday-sunday-part-ii.html
MFS, yes! the bob and weave looking for the sweet spot. We did that too when we could but since the place was fairly crowded it wasn’t always possible. I’ve not run into such a lighting problem before, the MIA is generally pretty good but this time, not so much.
I love museums, but the downside is always the massive crowds they attract (that sounds bad–it’s good that lots of people want to go to museums, only it’s too bad they are so packed you can’t really see much). Still, it sounds like you got to see some great art. I’d love to see Rembrandt’s art in person–book illustrations never do artwork justice! There is a Cindy Sherman exhibit at SFMoMA that I want to see–hmm, maybe I better make sure I don’t need tickets to that!
Danielle, we knew it would be crowded but I wasn’t prepared for the perfume. I know what you mean about being glad for the crowd and annoyed by it. I was happy there were so many people who cared enough to come see the paintings but it would have been really awesome to have been the only one standing at a painting for as long as I wanted. And no, pictures never do the real thing justice. Cindy Sherman is a huge exhibit that it would be cool to see if you have the chance.
When I was just out of college I worked in a law firm in the Prudential Building in Chicago. The Art Institute was on the next block and I’d go over on my lunch hour and wander around the Impressionists Gallery (I’d usually sit gazing at The Lady At The Piano by Renoir). Lightening is so important! I’m happy you and Bookman were able to see the exhibit. Crowds and lighting problems notwithstanding! Magical man, Rembrandt.
Grad, what a fun way to regularly spend a lunch hour. And both lightening and lighting are important in their own ways
Rembrandt is so magical that the crowds and bad lighting couldn’t spoil it.
Although lightening IS very important…when one is out in the rain…I think I meant “lighting”.
Last year, we went to see the Rembrandt exhibit on the Faces of Christ at The Philadelphia Museum of Art. I got to have that same experience of seeing paintings actually done by Rembrandt side-by-side with those done by students of his. There were even some about which experts aren’t quite sure, which left me trying to decide for myself. Fascinating! The whole exhibit was really, really good, but I liked that part of it best.
Emily, it’s really fascinating to be able to compare the paintings, isn’t it? There were a couple that had been started by students and finished by Rembrandt and even those looked different. And there was one or two where the attribution was in question and the plaques said that it was hoped that by having the exhibit and all the other paintings available for comparison that art historians would be able to work it out. But it was fun trying to decide for myself.
Oh ugh the cologne thing! I hate that too, and can easily be nauseated and headachy in the vicinity of strong perfume. Plus, anyone who doesn’t know how to stand before a painting with some consideration for others does not deserve entry (there ought to be spot checks and evictions!). I can so imagine the lighting problem, as Rembrant has those dark, glossy canvasses, but it is wonderful to think that despite these irritations, the paintings spoke to you and you loved them. That’s the sign of fabulous art.
Litlove, heh, people entering a crowded art gallery should have to pass a sniff and picture viewing test. Those who fail must go take a shower and take a class on how to be considerate to others also trying to view a painting. Yes, annoyances were minor compared to the beauty of the paintings. A once in a lifetime experience.
oh, how frustrating! I had several bad experiences about special exhibitions that were so crowded that I hardly got to see the painting (I’m petite). Because of this and because the tickets are getting crazy expensive (esp. if you don’t get to see), we now tend to stick to “normal” collections and smaller museums. But we’re lucky to live in a city with so many of them. My husband loves when we get to go to the Louvres and wander at night (they close at 9pm I think on some days) in nearly empty areas (far from the Joconde crowds).