The IU Art Museum and Tape Art at the Met

The experience at the Democracy and Politics panel (which IU President McRobbie kicked off with a speech congratulating everyone) which I discussed in this post inspired me to write to Adelheid Gealt, the director of the museum. The experience mostly concerned me bringing up in an open forum the problem of the IU Museum having so few works by women on their walls. (They do have several jewelry pieces in a case - but I think that the images that people have in their minds - the things that are hung on the walls are especially significant. Jewelrey is significant in other ways).

Ms. Gealt did favor me with a reply in which she wrote,

"I'm... very proud of the fact that our most recent major acquisition involves a painting by the leading German woman artist: Gabriele Munter -(for which all the funds were donated). That will be placed on display when our curator, Jennifer McComas, has the time to plan and implement it. A guiding factor in the selection of this artist, was the fact that she was a major figure among German Expressionists- and was a woman artist. Given our strong holdings of German Expressionism- it was important to have an example by her.

So that will be something to look forward to. In addition to that, Ms. Gealt wrote that there are works by Barbara Hepworth, Vigee Lebrun and Claire Zeissler on continuous display (I'll have to see if they are actually on the walls or on some little partition somewhere - because I only saw one work by a woman, at the most, when I did a survey of what was up). She wrote that other things rotate being up, including a sculpture by Nevelson and a painting by Janet Fish. Though she admitted that there may not often that much women's art up at any given time.

I hope that I didn't annoy Ms. Gealt too much with my questions (inquisition?). And hopefully there will be more attention paid in the future.
_______

As far as quilts being included in by the art establishment (part of my question to the Democracy and Politics panel) - There are art museums that have hosted quilt exhibitions - like the Indianapolis Museum of Art and their recent Gee's Bend exhibit. But often it seems that such things are not included in the same space as paintings, for instance. Museums often have the "decorative arts' areas. As if the paintings are not decorative (many people insist that they are not - or not "merely"). I suppose the idea is whether or not the painting or quilt or whatnot is transcendent. As if a painting can be transcendent and a quilt could not. As if a painted geometric patten is superior to one that is sewn.

I think a lot of confusion still exists when it comes to expressions by people - what they mean and what should be considered to be importatant, exemplified, or whatever and what should not. Of course that has been part of the whole 20th+ century question. Started with dada and all that.

And then there is transitory art. ...One of the more interesting things that the Metropolitan had up was an installation by a woman that was little rolled up circles of tape (pins helped hold it up - but you couldn't really see the pins). Tara Donovan at the Met

Tara Donovan (American, b. 1969) is known for working with commonplace manufactured materials such as tape, Styrofoam cups, or drinking straws to create abstract sculptural installations that often take on a biomorphic feel or resemble topographical landscapes. For a new work conceived specifically for this exhibition, the artist uses Mylar tape to create a wall-mounted installation that encompasses the entire gallery. Through a vast accumulation of webs of metallic loops, laboriously assembled, Donovan transforms the space into a unique phenomenological experience for the viewer.

I do tend to like art that is tangible, longer lasting - but with the state of the world - temporary art makes a lot of sense. Like flowers that come and go.