We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our family likes de Kooning, so we'll probably go to the the current show at the MOMA. Here's a brief review of Abstract Expressionist New York. I am still annoyed that we missed the Kandinsky show at the Guggenheim - lines to get in were always too long for me.
Even if I don't really get Jackson Pollock, we'll get a very good lunch someplace.
I have this pretention of being sensitive to art and artists in most genres, but I just don't get abstract expressionism. I can understand the classical definition, but the definition and the product just don't seem to mesh.
For example, de Kooning. His work is certainly attractive in terms of color spectrum, but what exactly is being "expressed"? Is it the layered technique that is attractive? What does it speak to? I feel the same way about most abstract expressionists - I just don't get it.
Bird Dog ... Whatever happened to the Russian Tea Room? Back before the Fall of Rome, when I was a student at Columbia, it used to be a treat we gave ourselves to have lunch there after we'd been to the Museum.