MoMA's new admission price $20???

But anyone that goes to Moma at any other time then Friday evenings...i.e. PAY WHAT YOU WISH. deserves to get gauged.

It's funny...most of the people that are bitching dont even go to MOMA all that frequently...so what's $20. and the membership is staying at $75 for all y'allz that go a lot.

BUT FRIDAY IS THE JUMP OFF @ MOMA & WHITNEY.
& THURSDAY AT THE GUGGIE IS FREE.
AND PAYING FOR PS 1 IS JUST DUMB.

WHY?

also, deebz has a super valid point: going when you have to pay $20 is stupid when you can wait a few days and go for free.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

MoMA's new admission price $25?!?!?!?!?!?! (59 new answers)
It's October 2008, why are you still buying CDs and what are they!?!?! (116 new answers, 123980 total)

or you could just go when it's free, thursday or friday nights or whatever.

either way, it's so packed out all the time that i doubt they are noticing your absence...

BTW, with a membership guest tickets are $5 apiece. So if one person gets a 75 membership, they can get four others in for 20. Seems fair to me.

just renewed my membership and have determined that, now that I'm working from home, Thursdays are likely going to be my museum-as-office day. You can make phone calls and work in the garden, go in for art, back out for work, back in for lunch, back out for an hour or two, back in again. Eight hour museum trips let that action really set in.

Headed back today to retry the kittredge and abramovich; the latter fucked my head about a bit on thursday. I talked to one of the artist/artworks for a half-hour in the garden; that was interesting and helpful!

the abramovich show was really amazing; it was really the kind of performance art I can understand and get behind

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/arts/design/16public.html

“He proceeded to slide his hand onto my ribs and back and then touched my butt,” Mr. Rawls said. “As he was passing me he looked me in the eyes and said

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/0/0a/Feelsgoodmangreen.jpg

I read The Awl too.

did they do that joke today? i read the times in the coffee shop this morning and came up with it independently

was not familiar with that meme until right now.

Since I mostly go to the films, most of the patrons I see are happy to be breathing; no feel-copping going on.

you're gonna tell me you've never been touched by a man in the titus?

So I saw the Tokyo Avant Garde exhibit today, or half of it anyway, and for the second time I was dumbfounded by the subtle jingoism and whitewashing in a large MoMA exhibition - in this case, the complete lack of mention of the words "hiroshima and nagasaki" on any wall text, as far as I could see. It was so fucking weird, because so much of the art was obviously a response to the atomic bomb (and probably also the firebombing of Tokyo and other cities, also not mentioned). In fact, I couldn't even find text that referred to the United States' role -- instead it was "the allied powers" and even then, I saw little mention other than their "occupation" of Japan following the war. I actually felt a little bit sick about this.

Last time I was there was for the Century of the Child exhibit, and that one was a bit more subtle -- soviet bloc and japanese education was presented as entirely nationalistic and propaganda-based, while american and western european education was free and creative.

LOL you think the MoMa isn't some co-opted bullshit propaganda arm of the establishment? This isn't 20 years ago, bro.

Sure, I mean the other shit I saw was some pointless, innocuous fruitcake who collects and spreads bee pollen sponsored by VW Das Auto. But I was still shocked that an exhibit on fucking POSTWAR JAPAN would not even acknowledge that the United States was like, why postwar Japan was what it was.

Like I'm not looking for radical critique here, I just thought certain basic historic facts were agreed on at this point.

I am kind of surprised they didn't do some sort of hand-wavy WII mentioning TBH, but I think it shows well the level of thought that goes into these installations and how much social credibility one can expect from museums that have been featured in MasterCard ads and shit.

ART SHOULD NOT BE POLITICAL

ART TRANSCENDS

It used terms like "postwar japan" and "allied forces occupation" a lot.

i haven't seen the exhibit but i wonder if it's not a move towards deemphasizing the impact of the united states on post-war japan. not that these pieces of art wouldn't reflect the war and the atomic attack but that they reflect other things that aren't dictated solely by the often overwhelming american projection. it's hard for me to imagine tho that anyone attending MOMA would be unaware of hiroshima and nagasaki.

i just mention this bc i've seen exhibits on post-war vietnam that were entirely about american crimes and went so far in the other direction that you didn't learn anything about vietnam that wasn't actually about the united states.

Yeah but you can't show a bunch of surrealist paintings of people's faces melting off and piles of dead mutant fish and "deemphasize the impact of the United States" at the same time

anyway I also think you're overestimating the MoMA crowd, it's disproportionately tourists

when i used to go to the free friday admissions it was mostly students

well yeah at that time probably. I think you're right that the NYU etc kids going there are all thinking about hiroshima when they see it whether or not the text tells them to.

they've shown about 70 films in the 'sidebar' for this series, many of which are explicit on US/bombs etc.

I haven't seen the gallery exhibit cuz I fucking hate crowds, and it's always crowded.

I've seen the show twice and though I get your point, I think the artwork's placards make it pretty clear that this is reactionary work and that the historical importance of WWII and Hiroshima and Nagasaki IS a given.
But I really liked the artwork and it was all totally new to me so maybe I just wasn't looking for any other agenda.