Photo: Instagram/@eec926
Ben Davis gives an object lesson in how to write a negative review that isn't mean, is entertaining to read, and makes a cogent meta-point along the way: "Ladies and Gentlemen, the Björk Show at MoMA Is Bad, Really Bad."
Samples, for those who prefer not to go read it:
"There's another creepy mannequin of Björk as a psychedelic Sherpa, from her 2007 Wanderlust video. There are many other creepy mannequins. Now that I think about it, this may be more of a show for fans of creepy mannequins than it is for fans of Björk."
"Once you have cleared a gallery, guards prevent you from going back, giving it the distinct feeling of being on a forced march through a prop closet."
Fun. (I like Artnet News, which is how I found this. You can subscribe to a daily or weekly newsletter. I should also say I was in love with Björk's darkling song "Human Behavior" a number of years back—no hate for her, although maybe visual art isn't her primary creative genius. Next Up at MoMA: David Byrne's album covers and big suits? Richard Gere's Tibetan photographs? Fingerpaint paintings Miley Cyrus makes with her tongue? C'mon, MoMA, take yourself seriously.)
Mike
Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
No featured comments yet—please check back soon!
That review could have been written about the David Bowie show with few alterations. The Bowie show was a cacophonous and immediately forgettable one. I want to leave an exhibition thinking, wondering, understanding.
But galleries need to get bodies through the gate. Although I don't know if this is MoMA's problem as the place seems crowded every time I visit.
BTW: interesting photo caption. That's a Nick Knight photo if I'm not mistaken.
Posted by: Paddy C | Thursday, 05 March 2015 at 12:56 PM
Not to be argumentative but both Bjork and Byrne are interesting artists that reach wider audiences that yr usual MOMA crowd. Museums must a attract a wider base to survive, grow and thrive.
Posted by: Jeff Macmillan | Thursday, 05 March 2015 at 01:05 PM
Yes indeed! Like with many artists, my love for them often stems from one profound work. I love Human Behavior. (The song, not the fact.)
Other delightful examples:
Innocence Mission:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eA4ZfLzy1VM&spfreload=10
Lenka:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHpvlr_kG6U&spfreload=10
Posted by: Eolake | Thursday, 05 March 2015 at 01:43 PM
Too cruel. Unnecessary and cruel - and for sure the costumes are interesting, aren't they? Still, even if they were half as good it would still be a cruel and unnecessary criticism.
Posted by: David Bennett | Thursday, 05 March 2015 at 01:48 PM
Dunno, read the NYT spread in its T Magazine and suspect the show is jumped-up, capital-intensive celebrity worship at its weirdest. Her long-time association with Mathew Barney(see his Cremaster stuff)was obviously influential. Lost interest in her music some time back.
Posted by: cgw | Thursday, 05 March 2015 at 03:06 PM
If Leica doesn't take itself seriously with "Lenny Kravitz" editions, I guess we can't expect MoMA to, either.
Posted by: Stephen Scharf | Thursday, 05 March 2015 at 04:50 PM
I read the article and it left me wondering what the reviewer thought the exhibit should consist of. Björk has worked with dozens of respected artists in various design disciplines and this show features that work. This is a bad thing? I'm missing something here. As to Sjón's use of the word 'girl', it is directly related to a series of Björk songs. She is definitely not for everybody, but lighten up a little, it's only an exhibit.
[I think the reviewer thought the exhibit should consist of an artist other than Bjork. --Mike]
Posted by: Stephen Cowdery | Thursday, 05 March 2015 at 08:38 PM
Up to now, I've never heard of Bjork and the only thing I know about the exhibit is what I read here and in the ArtNews article so who am I to say. But one has to wonder how the celebrity factor weighs in MOMA's decision to mount this exhibit.
If Mildred T.Shumway from Elizabeth City NJ had knocked on MOMA's door with this art, would the museum have mounted a "Shumway" exhibit. Somehow I doubt it.
Posted by: Edd Fuller | Friday, 06 March 2015 at 08:32 AM
The next step is, obviously, Lady Gaga.
Then it makes you wonder: why is it that women/celebrities with an interest in pop music/conceptual art end up being taken unseriously by the art crowd? Is it the long shadow of disgruntled Beatles fans harping on whatever could remotely look like Yoko Ono?
Do men/celebrities with abilities in pop music/postmodern art suffer the same infamy?
Posted by: Michel Hardy-Vallée | Friday, 06 March 2015 at 08:12 PM
The photo here is originally from Björk's Homogenic album cover.
Posted by: Scott Johnson | Friday, 06 March 2015 at 08:32 PM
Best music paraphenalia show I ever saw was (pallindrome allert) a jazz paraphenalia show in Amsterdam (in 1992 if memory serves)....among the many items was a poem written on a napkin by Satchmo....(Louis Armstrong).....it read (if memory serves again):
The bee's a busy beast you see, maybe that is why these days you see so many sons of bees.
Greats, Ed.
Posted by: Ed | Tuesday, 10 March 2015 at 03:15 PM