So recently, the class went to the Chelsea Art Galleries. Everyone was astonished to see such fine art but it did not tickle my fancy (Yes I actually remember you telling us to use that more often in conversation.)

To be completely honest, most of art I saw there was not creative enough, when I look at art, I want to see deeper meaning into it, either that, or it should be eye catching. Most of these galleries were neither one of them. There were a few galleries, the white circular room that were <i> cool </i> but they merely played a trick on my mind and that was it. Most of the art galleries were amusing, but nothing that was impressive enough to stick to my head.

I realize that my comments seem very negative, but maybe it's because I have been exposed to a lot of art otherwise. I like looking at photoshopped images, at photographs that are just stunning and you want yourself to be in that place. And through the internet, I have discovered so many different pieces of virtual art that the real art seemed to be amateurs in front of them.

Surprisingly though, this was the first event from our class that did not live up to its expectations. Maybe because of the lack of well dressed females in the audience. :)

-Sahil

Posted by Sahil Jain on December 19, 2008
Tags: Chelsea Galleries

Total comments on this page: 3

How to read/write comments

Comments on specific paragraphs:

Click the icon to the right of a paragraph

  • If there are no prior comments there, a comment entry form will appear automatically
  • If there are already comments, you will see them and the form will be at the bottom of the thread

Comments on the page as a whole:

Click the icon to the right of the page title (works the same as paragraphs)

Comments

No comments yet.

julianflores on whole page :

If one takes out the downpour that took place that day, the Chelsea galleries were actually a pretty memorable experience, at least for me. Having never been to anything close to this before, i prematurely had the feeling it was gonna be a waste of time, but it wasn’t.
One of the works that really caught my attention was the “volcano-looking thing” as my friend put it; the work where the ducks seemed to be captured in space and time in what looked like lava spewing from a volcano. I thought it was an excellent representation of Dante’s “Inferno.” Chaos seemed to be spreading everywhere, and the red/black colors reminded me of the underworld for some reason.
Yet another thing that captured my imagination was the funky-smelling rock and roll gallery. It was the one gallery i didn’t understand at all; there seemed to be a mix of everything in there. The only “silver lining” in this place was that i got a free lighter from the creepy guy with the hat that was sitting down..it says “Gringolandia”, or “white land”. Very interesting…

December 22, 2008 3:15 am
profjudell on whole page :

Andrew’s proclamations on the state of gallery art would carry more weight if he supplied some specific examples of work that he values, otherwise . . .

“I share no man’s opinion; I have my own.”
—Turgenev

May Julian’s lighter lift the veil of darkness from his future pathways.

January 1, 2009 8:42 pm
sahilj on whole page :

I am going to assume that by Andrew he actually meant me, who is the writer of this blog post.

By art that I have seen better, I mostly mean photo-shopped pictures which look like the most amazing pieces of art you can actually seen. And most of them are either fake, or enhancements from dull looking photographs / pictures. These computer generated models are spectacular and beat real photography any day.

An fine example of photoshop would be the PROF JUDELL HOLDING APPLE in our presentation. Not the type of art I look at, but a good example of what photoshop is.

January 1, 2009 10:56 pm

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

You must be login to comment.
Create an account or login