A blog about about painting, design and other aspects of aesthetics along with a dash of non-art topics. The point-of-view is that modernism in art is an idea that has, after a century or more, been thoroughly tested and found wanting. Not to say that it should be abolished -- just put in its proper, diminished place.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Announcement
Today Ray Sawhill (alias "Michael Blowhard") announced that the 2Blowhards blog was ending its eight-year run.
I was not one of the original Blowhards who gave the blog most of the charm and challenge that made it beloved by many. I signed on in 2005 after "Friedrich von Blowhard" found steady blogging too much of a distraction from time better spent on his family and business. My role was that of Second Banana to Ray, one that suited me just fine.
After Ray retired from the blog, I did my best to carry on. But there's only one Ray, and I could never hope to fill his shoes. Plus, I didn't want to post at a nearly daily pace, so letting 2Blowhards pass from the scene seemed a reasonable solution following the Great System Crash of 2010.
Art Contrarian will continue much of my style of 2Blowhards posting. That's because I've basically written to please myself, with the idea that a few others might also enjoy what I have to say. Political posting will be sparse or non-existent here and there might be a bit less in the way of historical and general cultural material than I produced at 2Blowhards -- this in deference to the theme of this blog.
Posting will be on the order of two posts per week plus or minus one or two. I notice that there are art blogs that do just fine at that pace, which means that readers learn to drop by a few times a week rather than daily.
Let me close by stating my profound gratitude to Ray Sawhill for giving me the opportunity to be a junior blogger on a blog I truly loved.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Getting Design Details Right
Guests are coming and my wife decided that today is the day to change vacuum cleaner bags. I had to deal with three different machines. And in the process got reacquainted with the art and craft of the machine-human interface.
All the detachable bags had the same annoying attachment feature -- a piece of cardboard stiffening on the bag along with a hole lined with rubber where the duct of the machine inserts. These are hard to deal with when it comes to actually making the insertion; a certain amount of aligning, pushing, fiddling with the alignment, pushing again -- with success usually coming after two or three tries. Since I'm asked to do this chore only a few times a year, I have no real learning curve to rely on.
I'm sure better bag attachments are possible, but the arrangement I found on three different brands of cleaners suggests that price of replacement bags was the most important consideration, so the arrangement was the cheapest one that would function passably well.

Hoover Portable Canister Cleaner
The little Hoover shown above had the best bag-changing design features. Even though the bag itself had the now-classical cardboard stiffener plus rubber-surrounded hole arrangement, the change operation worked smoothly -- almost.
It has a plastic connector piece where the cardboard could be slid on. Then all one needs to do is set the connector-plus-attached bag into a recess of the machine and close a hatch that has the waste hose attached -- it's aligned so that the hose connector inserts into the bag with no fuss.
But fuss there was. Not having the manual handy, I tried inserting the hose connection into the bag before shutting the hatch. The hatch refused to close. Repeatedly. Until I finally realized that the insertion was related to the closing of the hatch.
Ideally, a piece of equipment should be designed so that no manual should be needed, where everything should fit together only one possible way. That little Hoover comes very close to that ideal and is very nifty once one understands that final step. What's probably needed is a short message molded on the attachment plate stating that it and the bag should be placed in the bag compartment before closing the hatch. Perhaps newer versions than our three-year-old model fixed this detail.
[Cross-posted at 2 Blowhards.]
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Insipid Penny
I'm not into coins and therefore was surprised when I glanced at the reverse side of a penny I received in change a few days ago. It seems that after nearly 50 years of having the Lincoln Memorial, the Treasury decided it was time for a redesign. (In 2009 a set of reverses were minted to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, but I somehow never noticed any of those coins.)
Here are the reverses of the main penny designs of the past century:
"Wheat" design: 1909-1958
Lincoln Memorial design: 1959-2008
Redesign for 2010 and future penniesThe U.S. Mint's statement is here, and the Wikipedia entry here.
I don't know about you, but I think the new design is about as insipid and ugly as any experienced committee of camel designers could ever have come up with. It's probably the worst coin design I've ever seen (and as reference, I've got baggies full of old European coins eagerly awaiting to be used again should the Euro meet its demise).
Bring back "wheat" -- at least its design is honest and fills the space nicely.
[Cross-posted at 2 Blowhards.]
Monday, July 19, 2010
Mayfair Matte
Maybe it's happening in Palm Beach or the Upper East Side. Or perhaps in Beverly Hills, Malibu or Rancho Mirage -- though I was in the latter three within the last six months and didn't notice it.
That "it" is cars with matte -- rather than shiny -- paint jobs.
I noticed this in London's tony Mayfair district a couple of weeks ago, spotting at least three cars with matte finishes. And each of those cars was an expensive one -- the cheapest of the lot being a Porsche.
Here are some photos I snapped:
Of course one wonders Why?
I have no answer at this point, though my first reaction was that it must be some trendy thing for a small subset of those who buy cars costing more than $100,000.
[Cross-posted at 2 Blowhards.]
Sunday, July 18, 2010
The d'Orsay Adjusts to a Renovation
Paris' Musée d'Orsay, with its magnificent collection of (mostly French) art for the period 1850 to 1900 or a little later, is undergoing some renovation. The top floor or two are closed while work proceeds.
So what about the visitor spending mega-shekels to get to Paris to view all those goodies in person? Will he be disappointed? Feel cheated?
Probably not.
I entered the d'Orsay last Tuesday wondering about those matters, but a quick walk-around revealed that most of the important works were still on display even though a subset had been sent off to San Francisco for the duration.
Here's how they pulled it off. Galleries on the level above the main floor that usually are devoted to special exhibits were used to display paintings formerly found in the galleries on the highest floors. And it's possible that some paintings were re-hung closer together than previously in some other galleries (though a number of galleries seemed the same as they were last May when I paid my previous visit).
So, if you have tickets to Paris this summer or fall and want a good d'Orsay experience, you will find one.
[Cross-posted at 2 Blowhards.]
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Blogging Note
I am now in Paris and Internet access is spotty, especially because I'm (1) sightseeing and (2) trying to type this on a keyboqrd with a (éçèàù) French layout.
Normal blogging resumes after 16 July.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Blogging Note
Yr Obedient Blogger is in England (then Paris), and Internet contact is iffy. Which means posting may be light for the next couple of weeks.
I've been hitting the art gallery (that's what they call art museums here) scene pretty heavily and will have grist for future reports.
Also saw the new Andrew Lloyd Webber show Love Never Dies, in which the Phantom of the Opera goes to ... Coney Island?!? Kind of a so-what deal in my opinion. No take-away songs. Staging had some interesing Art-Nouveau touches. Probably lacks Phantom's legs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)