Spaceboykelly Member Username: Spaceboykelly
Post Number: 263 Registered: 04-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 9:06 am: | |
Andyguard, I would spend over 8 hours [maybe over 2 days time] to get any sort of a real sense of the DIA and much more time if you are able. I spent several hours there earlier on opening day and several more at night and I still haven't even seen half of it. Frank_c, by saying that correcting Cotter's calling the DIA small is a "typical dyes-er response" is actually giving us a lot of credit. It is obviously not small and that was an error. It is not accurate to refer to the 5th largest anything in the US as small. The party was a blast. I was a little afraid for the art... almost 30,000 people poured into the DIA. |
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73
Post Number: 265 Registered: 03-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 9:32 am: | |
Thanks SBKelly. |
Gazhekwe Member Username: Gazhekwe
Post Number: 1015 Registered: 08-2007
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 9:33 am: | |
I was there early in the week and only managed to get through the American Indian and African galleries. Wow! The artwork has been made relevant as the displays and descriptions connect the pieces with their purpose and link the people who made them and the people who view them. People were exclaiming over everything and planning to come back and spend more time. The excitement over the new presentations was palpable. I can't wait to go back and spend more time. The Kresge Court has been restored to its beauty, there are beautiful sparkly decorations hanging in the Main hall for a spark of fun and festivity. |
Neilr Member Username: Neilr
Post Number: 607 Registered: 06-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 9:48 am: | |
Andyguard, since you're only planning to be there a couple of hours, don't plan to see the whole place. Perhaps if you had just 3 goals, you might be better off. For example, when I went last week, I wanted to see the Contemporary Galleries and the Gift Shop, and then whatever else I might pass along my way. I had a relaxed 2 hour visit. Then, while you're having lunch, you can talk about all the things you missed seeing and plan for a return visit. |
East_detroit Member Username: East_detroit
Post Number: 1266 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 10:13 am: | |
Free access until 6pm tonight! http://dia.org/calendar/specia l_events/grand_opening.asp |
Jjw Member Username: Jjw
Post Number: 505 Registered: 10-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 10:42 am: | |
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------------------- "The Detroit Institute of Arts, one of the country’s small but classic encyclopedic museums, could be on an open prairie rather than in the center of a city, so faint is the urban buzz around it. Little commercial energy warms the nearby streets. Residential neighborhoods are at a distance. Traffic on the broad thoroughfare running past the museum is sparse..." NEWSFLASH: A person does not have to be from NYC to know this statement is true. |
Smogboy Member Username: Smogboy
Post Number: 6526 Registered: 11-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 11:25 am: | |
I think the part of where it states the DIA is small is a bit off though. From fifth largest to the third largest now? I guess we need a new definition of "small" then. |
Leoqueen Member Username: Leoqueen
Post Number: 1657 Registered: 07-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 11:54 am: | |
If the DIA is "small" then I am the same size as Halle Berry. Those of you who know me will catch the humor. |
Smogboy Member Username: Smogboy
Post Number: 6529 Registered: 11-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 12:06 pm: | |
Halle Berry- pre-pregnancy obviously. But consider humor caught, Leoqueen. |
Leoqueen Member Username: Leoqueen
Post Number: 1658 Registered: 07-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 12:14 pm: | |
Hey Smogboy, were you there last night? It was as much fun and as raucous as the KICK OUT THE JAMS opening in 1980....I was a young art pup then, but I remember the light shows and the rock and the dancing! |
Mauser765 Member Username: Mauser765
Post Number: 2119 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 12:14 pm: | |
Leoqueen is better looking. Berry is over-rated to the point of nausea. |
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn
Post Number: 645 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 12:17 pm: | |
was there from 11pm to 3:30 am last night! Talk about teeming with people! Everything looked fantastic. I will be going back basically every weekend to examine the new layout! I am so excited about this place FINALLY reopening! I haven't seen the whole museum in YEARS. |
Dialh4hipster Member Username: Dialh4hipster
Post Number: 2227 Registered: 11-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 12:19 pm: | |
quote:I find it particularly shitty that even in the face of a great art collection and redesign that they must focus on what's outside its walls more than what's inside. Detroit Free Press should do a piece on the new MOMA eventually, but focus on the grit of Brooklyn, only occasionally mentioning anything about art. You do know that the new MOMA is in Midtown, Manhattan, not Brooklyn, right? When the temporary MOMA was in Queens people DID write about the surrounding area. http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2002/07/01/020701ta_talk_goldberger (Message edited by dialh4hipster on November 24, 2007) |
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell
Post Number: 4319 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 1:10 pm: | |
I attended the DIA last night and have to say that I was very impressed, with only a couple of reservations. I walked through every gallery; it takes about three hours at a moderate clip. It suddenly seems so huge; it feels as if it has doubled in size [even though only about third larger] and it was a thrill to see throngs of people of every age and demographic as well as run into countless friends, all of whom were similarly impressed and complimentary. I entered through the front entrance past the reinstalled and refurbished Rodin's Thinker, turned left into the restructured American Galleries and was delighted to find the Hudson River Valley paintings, the first great truly American style and the best of the DIA's American collection, as the introduction. Prominently displayed and visible from the main foyer was Church's volcanic masterpiece Cotopaxi. Another delight was the presence to two magnificent Bierstadt's, on loan from the Manoogian collection. This would foreshadow the rest of the experience, the surprising appearance of delightful new works through out that the expansion allows. For those who may not know, the art on display is the tip of the iceberg of the total collection. As the author of the NYT piece noted the intended design to make navigation of the museum easier did not. I am reminded of such improvements at the RenCen. I got lost at couple of points. The big open courtyards with wide stairways and skylights that once gave me bearings were filled with new galleries and new stairways that were not easy to find. I was pleased to find a new rotating exhibition space off the Rivera Court, three or four galleries, that were formerly sleepy classical art galleries, alive with contemporary art. Changes like that and the aforementioned American art changes which break up the previous chronological presentation make the new displays invigorating and less pedantic than formerly without seeming awkward. The African Art collection and presentation is outstanding as are the galleries dedicated to the African-American art collection. The latter has some potential for controversy, as the NYT writer touches on, the inevitable gripe will come that it couldn’t make it on its own, but the works are outstanding and I heap praise for not only adding it but make it three galleries large. The unfortunate sins of our national past did forcibly create a separate culture with its own creative response and it is good to see it presented so forcefully without wallowing that past. Unfortunately a large part of the museum’s excellent Asian and Islamic art collection galleries were not completed in time for the opening, so you will only get to see a smathering of that. As noted above NYT writer was incorrect; there were a number of Detroit artists presented with the piece by Tyree being one the lesser among them. And, oh yes, I was delighted to find a magnificent piece by our very own Leoqueen on display. This is another great moment in what is turning out to be a chain of successes in Detroit that is slowly but surely doing much to change attitudes, interest people from our region and nationally and internationally to rediscover our overlooked and maligned but great city. Detroit Rises! |
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek
Post Number: 2612 Registered: 12-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 4:13 pm: | |
quote:The terms "small" and "encyclopedic" are mutually exclusive... one cannot have a encyclopedic collection in a small museum. Small refers to its size. Encyclopedic refers to how that space is organized. Asian art is in one area. African art is in the another. European art is in still another and so on. Some museums organize their collections in an encyclopedic fashion. Others either only have one style of art or allow all of the styles to blend together. Saying that "small" and "encyclopedic" are mutually exclusive is like saying that the words "blue" and "car" are mutually exclusive. |
Spaceboykelly Member Username: Spaceboykelly
Post Number: 265 Registered: 04-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 8:06 pm: | |
Yes, but it is NOT SMALL. It is one of the largest fucking museums in America. It doesn't matter if you're from Detroit, New York, or Yugoslavia... THE DIA IS NOT SMALL. My issue is that the first sentence in the article is plainly incorrect. It isn't a crazy Detroit pride thing... it is that I appreciate the NY Times and I would like them to try to print things that are factual. |
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek
Post Number: 2616 Registered: 12-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 8:15 pm: | |
If people quit arguing that words "encyclopedic" and "small" are mutually exclusive and focus their attention purely on the DIA's size, they would have an argument that people outside of Detroit will listen to. No one has ever convinced the New York Times to print a correction by saying something that is even stupider than what their critic said. (Message edited by fnemecek on November 24, 2007) |
Ray Member Username: Ray
Post Number: 1045 Registered: 06-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 24, 2007 - 10:22 pm: | |
As bella lugosi once said, there's no such thing as bad publicity. |
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 5795 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 1:21 am: | |
Fnemecek... when's the last time you've seen a small set of Encyclopedia's?? It sounds like you're defining Encyclopedic differently... Webster's Dictionary definition of "Encyclopedic" is... "covering a wide range of knowledge, or all aspects of a subject"... in this case ART. I think that Encyclopedic refers to the broad all encompassing range of art, rather than how it's displayed. Perhaps a DIA docent/employee can set the record straight... I suppose one could have a small Encyclopedic collection of art if one had only 1 or 2 items from each period of art history. But that's not what the art critic said. In any case if Detroit now has one of the top 3 or 4 or 5 largest art museums in the country. Saying it's small doesn't leave for many museums in the "medium" or "large" category. That also does Detroit a disservice in giving the New York audience a distorted view of what is really here. It seems rather silly arguing over this point, since none of the informed folks on this forum think that either the DIA building (over 650,000 square feet) or the DIA collections (numbered at over 60,000) are "small". (Message edited by Gistok on November 25, 2007) |
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek
Post Number: 2618 Registered: 12-2004
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 12:43 pm: | |
quote:Fnemecek... when's the last time you've seen a small set of Encyclopedia's?? I've seen encyclopedias that are so small, they're one volume editions. The Kingfisher History Encyclopedia is one example. The Britannica Concise Encyclopaedia is also only a one volume as is the Encyclopedia of Contemporary Chinese Culture.
quote:I think that Encyclopedic refers to the broad all encompassing range of art, rather than how it's displayed. From the Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary:
quote:en�cy�clo�pe�dic: of, relating to, or suggestive of an encyclopedia or its methods of treating or covering a subject. Since encyclopedic means relating to or suggestive of an encyclopedia, let's look at the definition of "encyclopedia" from the same source:
quote:en�cy�clo�pe�dia: a work that contains information on all branches of knowledge or treats comprehensively a particular branch of knowledge usually in articles arranged alphabetically often by subject. Please note my emphasis. How subjects are arranged is a key point in whether or not a book is an encyclopedia. Therefore, in the context of Mr. Cotter's critique, the word "encyclopedic" relates not to the size of the DIA, but how it is arranged. Sources: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/ encyclopedia and http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/ encyclopedic
quote:Perhaps a DIA docent/employee can set the record straight... I used to be a DIA docent. The DIA was a encyclopedic collection when I was there. It still is today.
quote:It seems rather silly arguing over this point... Whether or not it's "silly" depends on whether or not you want anyone at the New York Times to listen to your concerns and make corrections. No one has ever convinced the NYT to make a correction by saying things that are even stupider than what their critic has said. Therefore, if you're happy with the way Detroit is portrayed by the NYT and others, keep right on going. (Message edited by fnemecek on November 26, 2007) |
Alan55 Member Username: Alan55
Post Number: 778 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 12:53 pm: | |
Fremecek - you hit on the crux of the problem, albeit in a reverse way - I don't think that the NYT gives a damn about whether Detroiters are happy or not with their portrayal of Detroit. (The same goes for cities such as Cleveland, Atlanta, Houston, etc.) The only thing we can do here is either validate, or repudiate, their stated opinions so that third parties can judge for themselves. |
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 5796 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 1:30 pm: | |
Thanks Alan55! Fnemenek... I'm done with this argument... there's no point in continuing to take one line of my supposed letter and trying to make a meal out of a morsel... I am surprised to find out that you were a docent at our "little" DIA at one time. One would have thought that you would have been more indignant with their comments than you were with mine. |
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek
Post Number: 2620 Registered: 12-2004
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 6:51 pm: | |
Don't worry, Gistok. When it comes to people misusing words, I have enough ire to go around. As for the NYT, they will not lose any sleep worrying about how much the people of Detroit (or any other city) like or dislike them. However, they do worry about getting their facts straight. If one focuses on the specific, factual errors in their review, they will be much more inclined to listen. |
Thecarl Member Username: Thecarl
Post Number: 1194 Registered: 04-2005
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 6:54 pm: | |
call me a philistine; uneducated, unsophisticated, first-tier. i like the new marblework. |
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit
Post Number: 353 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 7:02 pm: | |
i thought it was too bad they used the word "small"...and the description of the area around the museum, while true in many ways, was unfortunate. the fact that the dia is in fact smaller compared to certain other "encyclopedic" museums, e.g. met, philly, etc. is not really the point. oh well... I thought the (re)opening was great and we should all be very bully on the new dia. |
Cinderpath Member Username: Cinderpath
Post Number: 272 Registered: 05-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 7:21 pm: | |
Alan 55 writes: Above are his first four sentences. Talk about hackneyed writing. Heard it all before - Detroit, worn, tired old city. Yeah, yeah. Sorry, but this guy thinks he is F. Scott Fitzgerald, writing the Great American Novel instead of an art review. Maybe he starts his reviews of the Metropolitan Museum of Art or the Guggenheim with, "New York - litter-strewn streets filled with arrogant, loud-mouthed blowhards, while taxi horns are blaring at anyone and everyone." -Thanks for providing a much needed laugh Alan :-) Priceless what you wrote......... |
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313
Post Number: 559 Registered: 02-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 7:39 pm: | |
Small??? at 677,000 sq ft The DIA is now the 4th largest art museum in the nation! <313> |
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 4058 Registered: 02-2005
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 8:31 pm: | |
^THAT is the first thing (and really the only thing) that struck me from that pretty interesting review. |
Fmstack Member Username: Fmstack
Post Number: 13 Registered: 06-2007
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 8:38 pm: | |
The New Yorker article Dialh4hipster linked to above was fantastic. I love that it presented the architect as focusing on incorporating the surrounding neighborhood, rather than trying to put together a building that looked like it was somewhere more conventionally "nice." I think that pretending a neighborhood, or a city, is nicer than it is is a form of denying that neighborhood, or denying that city -- even if the pretending is done for the otherwise laudable purpose of attracting people to the place. No out of towner who hasn't already been acclimated to the weirdnesses of Planet Detroit is going to be enthusiastic about the neighborhoods a few blocks away from the Cultural Center, unless they're real, real big on the sublimity of decay. Even though those parts of town are better off than a lot of places in this city, they're still raggedy as all hell. And it's perfectly fair for a writer sent on assignment to somewhere freaky weird to point out in their article that the place is in fact freaky weird. It'd be a form of neglect for the place to not mention it. (Message edited by Fmstack on November 25, 2007) |
Skylark Member Username: Skylark
Post Number: 7 Registered: 08-2007
| Posted on Sunday, November 25, 2007 - 9:41 pm: | |
You're right on Gerhard! |
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup
Post Number: 3150 Registered: 06-2004
| Posted on Monday, November 26, 2007 - 9:02 am: | |
My Mom & I spent about four hours there yesterday. She hadn't been there in ages (she's 77) and really enjoyed the experience, although some of the more popular galleries were quite crowded. We're tentatively planning a return next Saturday after my niece's choir sings at the library. When we left at 5:30 the sign near the door read over 51,000 visitors for the opening weekend. I think I saw as many adults using the "I Spy" clues as I did kids, and, short of field trip groups, I don't think I've ever seen as many kids of all ages there. |
The_ed Member Username: The_ed
Post Number: 1168 Registered: 10-2007
| Posted on Monday, November 26, 2007 - 9:08 am: | |
My family and I went to the DFT on saturday to see The Red Balloon and White Mane. After that we ventured into the museum to find it totally crowded and full of life. It looks really great! Didn't get to all of the galleries we wanted to but it gives us something to look forward to. |