Modernism’s doctrine of functionalism put the ornamental in a corner and spat at it, but apparently the decorative is making a quiet comeback. The Museum of Contemporary Art Tokyo recently brought together ten contemporary Japanese artists under the idea of Neo-Ornamentalism, for an exhibition that had echoes of Buddhist sand mandalas – with Motoi Yamamoto’s temporary 12 by 15 metre ‘salt painting’ on the museum’s floor (below) – as well as European rococo and the repetitive patterns of Islamic arts.
Image credits: 1. Katsuyo AOKI, Predictive dream Ⅸ, 2009, Private collection, Courtesy of Röntogenwerke. 2. Motoi YAMAMOTO, Labyrinth, Installation view at Force of Nature, Artist in Residence, Halsey Institute of Contemporary Art, Charleston, SC, U.S.A. 2006, Salt. 3. Atsuo OGAWA, cutter knife skating, 2009, Engraving on soap. 4. Tomoko SHIOYASU, Cutting Insights, 2008, Paper, TAKAHASHI COLLECTION, Courtesy of SCAI THE BATHHOUSE, Photo by Keizo Kioku. 5. Hiroshi MIZUTA, An apartment in gray, 2009, Oil on canvas, Artist’s collection, Courtesy of ARTCOURT Gallery. 6. Junichi MORI, minawa, 2008, Wood, Courtesy of void+. 7. Kentaro YOKOUCHI, book-tear, 2008, Dye and medium, satin, Collection of Museum Contemporary Art Tokyo.
Posted by a 8:10 PM, April 15th, 2010 3 comments
This show was really interesting, simple and beautiful.
Comment by Troy — April 16, 2010 @ 8:50 pmThe evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornamentation from objects of everyday use.
In the womb the human embryo goes through all phases of development the animal kingdom has passed through. And when a human being is born, his sense impressions are like a new-born dog’s. In childhood he goes through all changes corresponding to the stages in the development of humanity. At two he sees with the eyes of a Papuan, at four with those of a Germanic tribesman, at six of Socrates, at eight of Voltaire. At eight he becomes aware of violet, the colour discovered by the eighteenth century; before that, violets were blue and the purple snail was red. Even today physicists can point to colours in the solar spectrum which have been given a name, but which it will be left to future generations to discern.
A child is amoral. A Papuan too, for us. The Papuan slaughters his enemies and devours them. He is not a criminal. But if a modern person slaughters someone and devours him, he is a criminal or a degenerate. The Papuan covers his skin with tattoos, his boat, his oars, in short everything he can lay his hands on. He is no criminal. The modern person who tattoos himself is either a criminal or a degenerate. There are prisons in which eighty percent of the inmates have tattoos. People with tattoos not in prison are either latent criminals or degenerate aristocrats.
The urge to decorate one’s face and anything else within reach is the origin of the fine arts. It is the childish babble of painting. But all art is erotic. A person of our times who gives way to the urge to daub the walls with erotic symbols is a criminal or a degenerate. What is natural in the Papuan or the child is a sign of degeneracy in a modern adult.
Comment by Adolf Loos — April 18, 2010 @ 12:19 pmMr Loos, is not the urge to decorate what sets man apart from amoral animal? Are you suggesting the developing child’s advancing perception of colours relates to the child’s evolution as parallel to the removal of ornament? We see what we learn to see, but if ‘colour’ comes from ‘colos’ (a covering) or ‘celare’ (to hide), it is a learned deception. Perhaps a seven-year-old Papuan does not see violet because he is not yet corrupted. Also, have we met?
Comment by Amelia Groom — April 21, 2010 @ 12:45 pm