I’m sure I’m late in the discussion, but I had to mention my experience two weekends ago at the opening preview at BCAM. I went there primarily to see a new performance by the Los Angeles Contemporary Dance Company, choreographed by Michael Crotty and inspired by some of the artwork inside the BCAM. Often splayed and baking on the concrete, the company performed three times a day for three days [I believe]. While waiting in line, guests were treated to a very nice treat that began with the dancers slowly creeping through the lampposts. It was a very nice preview of how the company works, though I don’t think there was much improvisation [which was aplenty at the first show I saw of theirs, Pinky Swear]. Their next local performance is in April. Buy tickets.

Speaking of dance and fine art in town, Pharmaka has been exhibiting collaborative dance projects at its space that are complex and remind me of some of our upcoming projects.

Oh, and there was art in the buildings too, a survey that smacked of the 80s and art textbooks from high school. As I’m not as aware of what’s happening on the museum circuits, I was surprised to be thoroughly familiar with all the artists, which was more of a letdown. Here’s who was represented.

Old favorites: Robert Rauschenburg, Cy Twombly, Jasper Johns, David Salle, Andy Warhol, Basquiat, Jeff Koons, Leon Golub, Susan Rothenberg, Jenny Holzer, Chris Burden, Damien Hirst, Robert Therrien, Richard Serra, Ed Ruscha, John Baldessari, Mike Kelley, Barbara Kruger, Cindy Sherman, Roy Lichtenstein, Ellsworth Kelly

It seems, again, that LA is playing catch up. The Mike Kelley room was incredibly eerie to me, and the Serra pieces seem to be a big favorite. I’m sure children would enjoy this exhibit, but children also eat paste. Come on LA, where’s something as exciting as the New Museum here, where both the structure and art inside seem to be boldly going where leftovers from the 80s and early 90s cease to strive? I’m not sure.

He sounds almost mystical here, does he not:

To fail to experience gratitude when walking through the corridors of the Metropolitan Museum, when listening to the music of Bach or Beethoven, when exercising our freedom to speak or, as happened to us three weeks ago, to give, or withhold, our assent, is to fail to recognize how much we have received from the great wellsprings of human talent and concern that gave us Shakespeare, Abraham Lincoln, Mark Twain, our parents, our friends…We need a rebirth of gratitude for those who have cared for us, living and, mostly, dead. The high moments of our way of life are their gifts to us. We must remember them in our thoughts and in our prayers; and in our deeds.

A gratitude towards our tradition, in a clear sense. Tradition being, of course, the democracy of the dead.

Design and the Elastic Mind, currently on display at the MOMA is without question the best design show I’ve actually been to in person. There was a review in the NY Times which had one sentence I’d like to expand upon a little bit:

“As revolutionary in its own way as MoMA’s Machine Art exhibition of 1934, which introduced Modern design to a generation of Americans, the exhibition is packed with individual works of sublime

I really believe that we are now entering this “information age” where technology, art and design are cooperating and informing each other in much the same way that they were in 1934. We are on the verge of a technosocial shift, a pivotal moment when the way that human/object and human/human interactions are redefined by the technologies we have created. Curator Paola Antonelli cites the Eames film “Powers of Ten”as an influence in this exhibit, and I would take that a step further to suggest that “Powers of Ten” is the lens through which we have gone from a macro-investigation of natural geometry in design (1934 Machine Art exhibition) to our new micro-investigation of natural geometry in design (2008 Design and the Elastic Mind exhibition). Computing power has magnified scientists, engineers, designers, and artists ability to harness the power of natural organization for constructive uses. The excellent essays in the catalog expand upon this, but to better illustrate the comparison of these two shows,

Here’s an excerpt from the 1934 Machine Art

“Machines are, visually speaking, a practical application of geometry. Forces which act in straight lines are changed in direction and degree by machines which themselves are formed of straight lines and curves. The lever is geometrically a straight line resting on a point. The wheel and axle is composed of concentric circles and radiating straight lines. The watch spring is a spiral. Sphericity and circularity are the geometrical characteristics of a ball bearing. Screws, bearing springs, and propellers are various- and variously beautiful- applications of the helix and an image from the 1934 Machine Art catalog:

Here’s an excerpt from the 2008 Design and the Elastic Mind

“Biomimicry is the strategy that designers and engineers use to observe and learn from nature’s sophisticated designs and implement these lessons in artificial objects. The lilly impeller is a mixer ‘designed using the elegant and effective geometries found in natural fluid flow,’ explains the designer. Its shape, based on the logarithmic curve known as the Fibonacci spiral and found in such objects as the nautilus shell and whirlpools, allows liquids to flow centripetally through it with little friction. As a result the device is capable of circulating millions of gallons of water with a minimal amount of energy. Used in municipal reservoir tanks, the mixer prevents drinking water from stagnating, reducing the need for disinfectant picture from the 2008 Design and the Elastic Mind show:

Go see this show. I’ve been twice and I’m not done yet. Better yet, get the catalog, read it, then go look at what is there- there is a LOT to digest in this exhibition.