Modigliani: Beyond the Myth
Art Gallery of Ontario
Oct. 23, 2004 - Jan. 23, 2005

March 3, 2005

The Art Gallery of Ontario recently put on an exhibit,  Modigliani: Beyond the Myth (Modigliani paintings). Toronto does not have a great permanent collection of the masters. This scarcity means that one will be more motivated to go when an opportunity arises. So I went.

The exhibit's title Beyond the Myth seems somewhat inadequate. The myth, i.e. Modigliani's biography, is that he was from Tuscany and went to Paris to learn and practise art. This was the Paris of Picasso and Braque. In Paris he lived an improvised bohemian life. He was a struggling artist who was a womanizer and drunkard. He was unable to sell his paintings. A kindly grocer accepted them as barter! Modigliani died a pauper's death. After his death, apparently almost immediately, his paintings began to achieve good prices.

Modigliani has became an icon of modern art. This transformation seems to me to be the most interesting part of his life. How is it that  an obscure painter can achieve post mortem fame? The exhibit itself is a testament to this transformation. Modigliani would have rebelled against such an "institution" and it is ironic that his work becomes a raison d'être for the "institution's" existence. Why do we celebrate in death, people who, when alive, we despise?

Is this simply economics? After his death the promoters took over. Promoters have an understanding of what will "sell" and it would appear that Modigliani's body of work had what it took. What was the catalyst for this transformation? The thinking of businessmen and artists are so antagonistic that efforts to answer these questions can not be made!

Possibly, of course, it is the painting. The reclining nudes are clearly impressive. I look at the painting with an uneducated eye. What I see is the distortion of perspective. The artist is trying to show the 'true' rather than the apparent.

Does one have a better understanding of Cocteau from his portrait ? I think so, since we are forced to feel; to break away from a strictly analytical appraisal. However, the eyes, with one left perfectly blank, and the repetitive angular noses, seem to me to be less impressive. The artist is trying too hard and these devises become affectations; an earnestness by the artist to achieve the mystical  which ultimately fails.

A couple of quibbles about the exhibit. There is an activity room in the middle of the exhibit for kids. When I was there, a group of middle school kids was busily 'creating'. This was very annoying to those that came to see the exhibit.

This was an interesting and worthwhile exhibit. The unstated lesson of the exhibit is that Artists of note live at the margins of society. However, society needs these social outcasts to provide for innovation and cultural evolution. Is this simply the chance of cultural whim,  subtle economics, or the manifestation of some hidden subconscious social dynamic? That is, what is beyond the myth? The questions remain unanswered.


Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1