The Eight (Nyolcak) – “Hungarian Fauvists”;

While we were in Budapest a few weeks ago we visited the Museum of Fine Arts on Hero’s Square. Like all the museums in the city, the entry pricing structure was very complicated. In addition to the permanent collection there were a number of temporary exhibitions and you had to pay an additional charge on top of the basic entry fee for each of these you wanted to visit. Looking at the list we decided to have a look at the exhibition entitled “The Eight (Nyolcak)” which, according to the limited information available at the entry, was devoted to paintings by a group of Hungarian artists influenced by the new modern art styles in Paris at the turn of the 20th Century. It sounded like it might be of interest and the charge didn’t add much to our entry fee for the permanent collection.

We had a look round the sections of the permanent collection which were of most interest to us (it’s a massive collection and there’s far to much to see during one visit) and then thought we’d have a quick look at the temporary exhibition we’d paid for. We expected it to be of limited interest, and would get round it fairly quickly. How wrong we were. It was a large scale contains about 200 paintings, drawings, sculptures and we were taken aback by just how good they were. We ended up spending considerably longer than we expected looking around.

“The  Eight” were, as the name suggests, a group of radical young Hungarian artists – Róbert Berény, Dezső Czigány, Béla Czóbel, Károly Kernstok, Ödön Márffy, Dezső Orbán, Bertalan Pór and Lajos Tihanyi – who met in Paris where they were studying. They were strongly influenced by the modern art movements developing there. Karoly Kernstok, the oldest member of the group was its de facto leader. All of them, except Kernstok and Maffry were Jewish.

On returning to Budapest they organised an exhibition in 1909, which was a turning point in the history of Hungarian art. For the first time the public was introduced to the new styles of art and the exhibition didn’t, to put it mildly, meet widespread approval. A further two exhibitions were organised in 1911 and 1912. Not all of the group participated in the later exhibitions, which also included works by other associated artists.

The exhibitions were accompanied by series of cultural events. Participants included  the poet Endre Ady, the composers Béla Bartók and Zoltán Kodály, and the philosopher György Lukács. It seems to me that for a relatively brief period certain sections of Hungarian society were receptive to new ideas, including modern movements in the arts. This is also reflected in architecture where Szecesszió buildings became fashionable in the rapidly developing Pest area of the capital.

It wasn’t to last. The storm clouds of war gathered over Europe and Hungary, as part of the Austo-Hungarian Empire were involved in the conflict. After the war, in 1919, there was a brief period when the Communists took power creating the Soviet Republic of Hungary. When this was crushed, Hungary was ruled by a right wing dictator, Admiral Horthy, and as is the case with such reactionary regimes, there is little room for radical forms of art.

Most of the members of the Eight were radical in their political views as well as their art and actively participated in the Soviet Republic. Károly Kernstok who was a commissioner for culture and education. When it fell he emigrated and lived in Berlin until 1926 when he returned to Hungary. Róbert Berény , became the leader of the department for painting in the Art Directorate. His poster, “Stand to!” became one of the symbols of the revolution. After 1919, he fled to Berlin, only returning to Hungary in 1926. Bertalan Pór and Lajos Tihanyi were also revolutionaries (Pór designed posters for the Republic) and had to leave the country in 1919. Pór emigrated to Czechoslovakia, where he made a living by painting portraits. He returned to Hungary after the Second World War and became a teacher at the Art School in Budapest in 1948. Lajos Tihanyi emigrated to Vienna, and from 1924 he lived in Paris where he painted non-figurative pictures. Pór emigrated to Czechoslovakia, where he made a living by painting portraits. He returned to Hungary after the Second World War and became a teacher at the Art School in Budapest in 1948. Lajos Tihanyi emigrated to Vienna, and from 1924 he lived in Paris where he painted non-figurative pictures.

Orbán Dezső remained in Hungary andfounded the Arts and Crafts Academy, Atelier, in Budapest in 1931. being Jewish he fled from Hungary in 1939 eventually settling in Australia where he worked as an artist, living to the ripe old age of 101.

The Exhibition at the Museum of Fine Arts which opened on 18 May and runs to 12 September. It includes a large number of works from all three of the original exhibitions together with contextual information and earlier works by members of the group and other, less radical, modernist movements. I felt that it was an excellent exhibition and that these artists deserve much wider recognition outside Hungary.

Due to the large selection of works on show,which are displayed chronologically, it’s possible to see how the styles of the different individuals changed over the relatively short period. Initially very strongly influenced by Cezanne and the Fauves, some of the later works are more cubist and Expressionist in style. Each individual artist developed in different ways and there is a clear divergence in style.

There are a number of dominant themes evident in their work, illustrated by the examples below.

Self portraits

There were self-portraits of most of the group in the exhibition.

Self-portrait with Straw Hat by Róbert Berény (1906). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Self-portrait with Top Hat by Róbert Berény(1907) . Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary. Here he emphasises his Jewish characteristics, undoubtedly as a radical statement.

Self portrait by Lajos Tihanyi (1910). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Self portrait by Lajos Tihanyi (1912). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary. A later painting showing a distinct cubist influence.

Self Portrait by Dezső Czigány (1912). Picture source Wikipedia

Constructive self portrait by Ödön Márffy (1914) . Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary.  Another a cubist influenced painting.

Reclining Female Nudes

Reclining Nude by Róbert Berény(1906) . Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Reclining Nude by Ödön Márffy (1911) . Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

“Small Nude” by Lajos Tihanyi (1911).

Picture source: www.magyarmuzeumok.hu

Reclining Nude by Dezső Orbán Picture source: Art Portal

Other Nude Figures

Woman with glass by Róbert Berény (1906). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Boy Leaning against a Tree by Károly Kernstok (1911). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Other Portraits

Portrait of György Bölöni by Lajos Tihanyi(1912) – Picture source: Wikipedia

Portrait of Béla Bartók by Róbert Berény (1913). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

The Family by Bertalan Pór (1909) Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Groups of Figures

Sermon on the Mountain by Bertalan Pór (1911) Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Riders on the shore by Károly Kernstok (1910). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Still Lives

Many of the still lives on display are clearly strongly influenced by Cezanne.

Still Life by Dezső Czigány (circa 1910). Picture source Wikipedia

Still Life with apples and plate  by Dezső Czigány (1910). Picture source Wikipedia

Still life by Róbert Berény (1910). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

Landscapes

There were vary few landscapes and most of those that were on display appeared to be earlier works.

Street at Passau by Dezső Orbán Picture source: Art Portal

View of a Street at Nagybánya by Lajos Tihanyi (1908). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary. This is somewhat reminiscent of paintings by Gauguin during his time in Brittany.

Kernstok’s Stained Glass Window Design

The Schiffer building is a late Art Nouveau style building constructed between 1910 and 1912 for by Miksa Schiffer, a wealthy entrepreneur. Kernstok was commissioned to design a stained glass window for the building. It was restored in the 1980’s.

Although not shown in the original exhibitions, a copy of the design featured at the end of the Museum of Fine Art exhibition.

Stained Glass Window Design for the Schiffer Villa by Károly Kernstok (1910). Picture source: Fine Arts in Hungary

A number of the pictures above were sourced from the Fine Arts in Hungary website, which was set up to present a full range of fine arts in Hungary by introducing artists and their most important artworks from the beginnings in the 11th century to the middle of the 20th century. As well as an education tool, it is intended to increase knowledge of Hungarian fine arts which, despite their abundance, are somewhat underrated outside the country.

Other websites with information about, and pictures by the Eight include:

http://stefanvandrake.blogspot.com/2011/07/eight-part-2.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eight_(Nyolcak)

http://artportal.hu/international/english/list/

Wembley

One of the most important occasions on the sporting calander, for me, is the last Saturday in August, the date of the Rugby League Challenge cup final. Since 1929, it’s been held at Wembley, with a break between 2000 and 2007 when the old stadium was demolished and replaced by the modern arena.  Wigan played in the first final at Wembley, when they beat Dewsbury 13-2, and it became an annual pilgrimage in the late 1980’s and 90’s when they played, and won, the cup 8 years in succession (1988 to 1995). Their last visit was in 1998 when they were overwhelming favourites but were well beaten by unfancied Sheffield Eagles.  They won the cup again in 2002, beating the old enemy St Helens at Murrayfield. However they couldn’t repeat the feat at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff when they lost to Saints in 2004.

This year Wigan reached the final for the first time since 2004, facing Leeds. So it was the first opportunity to see them play at the new stadium.

I went to Wembley for most of the finals during the 80’s and 90’s, including the game against Sheffield. It was always a great occasion with a good atmosphere, but it the stadium was showing it’s age. The fabric was crumbling, the facilities were poor and the seats were cramped and uncomfortable. It needed redeveloping. So I was looking forward to seeing and experiencing the new stadium,  designed by Foster and Partners and Populous.

The stadium is dominated by the massive arch which is 134 metres high and has a span of 317 metres. The arch has a structural role, supporting the roof, but it is principally intended to provide a distinctive “signature” feature, a substitute for the famous and much loved “twin towers” of the old stadium.

We arrived before the turnstiles opened, so I had the chance to have a look around the outside of the stadium. The arch is certainly distinctive, but I wasn’t particularly impressed by the exterior, which was rather bland with no significant design features other than the arch.

The real test of the success of the design is how good it is for the purpose for which it was built – i.e. staging sporting events. It was principally intended to stage football matches (although it can be adapted for athletics events) which means it should also be suitable for rugby matches which have more or less the same requirements for the playing area and for spectators.

The stadium is a giant bowl, protected from the elements by a sliding roof that does not completely enclose it. There should be a decent view from every seat, although with a 90,000 capacity those sat high up at the back are quite distant from the pitch. The seats close to the front don’t allow a good overview of the action, but that’s always a problem with sports stadia.

(picture source Wikipedia)

There are, essentially, three levels of seating. The best seats are in the middle layer, running all round the stadium. These are exclusively reserved for members of “Club Wembley”. Members purchase a licence for a seat for one or more years. That gives them a seat at all the games played in the stadium plus access to exclusive bars and restaurants well away from the rabble . If they decide not to turn up and not to sell the right to use their seat for a game they don’t attend, the seat is empty. There is no way empty seats in this section of the stadium can be included in the allocation to the clubs or purchased via the Rugby League. The result is that a large tranche of the stadium containing the seats that have the best view  is inaccessible to fans and is largely empty during the Challenge Cup final (see photo below). Not only that, this almost empty region separates the lower and upper areas where the fans are located, spoiling the atmosphere to some extent.

I bought one of the more expensive tickets available to Wigan season ticket holders as I wanted to get a good view of the match while still being in amongst the fans. I didn’t want to be up in the “gods”. So I ended up relatively low down in the 13th row. The view was reasonable, but it was difficult to see what was going on t e wing furthest from where I was sat. This is not really acceptable when you’ve shelled out for what you think will be a good seat. I wouldn’t have been happier in the cheaper seats higher up. What was really annoying is that the seats with the best view – the Club Wembley tranche, which hadn’t been on sale to fans via the clubs or the Rugby League – were largely unoccupied.

To me Club Wembley sums up how sport is run these days – i.e. priority is given to commercial organisations (who, I guess, purchase the majority of the licenses to wine and dine clients during major football matches and who aren’t;t that interested in other events) and well heeled individuals constituting the “prawn sandwich brigade”. The real sports fans are treated as second class citizens who can be shunted into seats with an inferior view and who cares if the atmosphere is spoiled so long as the profit is maximised. The stadium has been designed specifically to accommodate this.

The roof covers the seated areas. It is retractable, so that it can be pulled back when the stadium is not in use to allow the grass on the pitch to be exposed to sunlight. During matches it is closed to cover the seated areas to protect spectators from the elements. It doesn’t close completely, though. For me, there is a major problem with the roof as it casts a shadow over a large area of the pitch. On a sunny day there is a big variation between shaded and un-shaded areas. This creates particular problems for T.V. coverage as the cameras can’t cope with the variation in the lighting levels very well. It’s less of a problem for the spectators, but to me it’s poor design.

Facilities within the stadium are quite good, with plenty of toilets, food outlets (selling overpriced, unhealthy food) and bars in the concourse area. However, they need to have more toilets accessible outside as many fans had quite a wait after they arrived before the turnstiles were opened.

The seating was a big improvement on the old stadium. In particular, there was considerably more leg room, which is important when you’re seated for a few hours.

I wasn’t impressed with the infrastructure around the stadium. The car and coach parking arrangements were exceptionally poor. Access and egress to the coach park via an industrial estate was very poor. Coaches were parked bumper to bumper and the lack of markings on the coach park made it very difficult to locate my coach at the end of the match. The exit from the coach park was poorly managed. It was very much every man for himself leading to a chaotic scramble with coach drivers trying to force their way through the melee. I’d suggest that they need to mark out lanes, with clear markings and other signs to allow spectators to find their coach.

Car parking was very limited an, in my view, totally adequate for the major national stadium. Of course people should be encouraged to make use of public transport but that can be expensive, especially for family groups, many of whom attend the Challenge Cup Final. Coach fares were around £40 from Wigan and that would have been £160 for a family of four who would have already shelled out at least £164 on tickets.

So I don’t think the stadium is a complete success. The design is rather bland and although it potentially fulfils its function as an arena for major sporting events well, it is let down by poor infrastructure and commercial greed being put before the interests of the fans.

As for the match, well I came away happy Wigan having won 28 – 18. It wasn’t an easy victory, though. Wigan raced into a 16 – 0 lead in the fist half hour but then had to work hard to contain a spirited fightback by Leeds, which made it a nail-biting finish and an exciting game to watch. There was some controversy about some of the refereeing decisions, but none of those complaining about those that went against Leeds seem to have noticed some poor decisions that led to the two Leeds tries that started their recovery. Still I think Wigan deserved this hard fought win.  It was good to be there to see them collect the cup.

Stadium picture from Wikipedia originally posted to Flickr by Ian Wilson at http://flickr.com/photos/36959242@N00/3915345026. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Art Nouveau in Budapest

Budapest was originally two cities – Buda built on the hills on the west bank of the Danube Pest on the east bank. Although there was a settlement on the east bank as far back as Celtic times, Pest was overshadowed by  Buda which became the capital of medieval Hungary, but developed rapidly in the 19th century during the period of Austrian dominance and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The first bridge over the Danube connecting the two cities, the Széchenyi Chain Bridge, was constructed in 1849 and the two cities were united in 1871.

Most of the buildings standing today in Pest  were constructed during the massive expansion of Pest during the mid to late 19th Century and the early 20th Century, when there was obviously a lot of money swilling around. Like in all the great European cities at this time, many of the emerging manufacturing and commercial class largely had a conservative approach to architecture, looking backwards to older architectural forms for their inspiration, so building styles were strongly influenced by earlier periods. Consequently there are many neo-classical, neo-gothic , neo-Renaissance, and neo-everything-else structures throughout the city.

However, there were some more forward thinking architects and members of the industrial and commercial classes who were receptive to new ideas. One result was the birth of Art Nouveau in Belgium, which quickly spread throughout Continental Europe. Jugendstil in Germany, Secessionism in Austria and Szecesszió in Hungary were related movements which all attempted to bring fresh ideas to architecture and the decorative arts.

The pioneer of Szecesszió architecture in Budapest was Ödön Lechner. He’d originally worked on “neo” / “historicist” buildings but after spending time working in Paris and London he started to look to develop a new Hungarian style. He won the competition to design the building for the Museum of Applied Arts which was constructed between 1893 and 1896. The result was  a dramatic fusion of Art Nouveau, Hungarian and Eastern influences.

He went on to design other landmark buildings including the Post Office Savings Bank (below) and the Sipeki-Balazs villa.

Other architects followed his lead and the Szecesszió style became the height of fashion until the First World War. Consequently there are many hundreds of Szecesszió buildings, or buildings with elements of the style, throughout Pest.

Another landmark building is the Gresham Palace (1904-06) which stands immediately facing the Chain Bridge.  Designed by Zsigmond Quittner for the British Gresham Life Assurance Company, it originally contained offices, luxury residences and a shopping arcade. After falling into disrepair during the Communist period, it now houses a luxury hotel.

The House of Hungarian Art Nouveau on Honvéd Utca, not far from the Hungarian Houses of Parliament and the Post Office Savings Bank, is housed in a Szecesszió  building designed by Emil Vidor in 1903, for the Bedő family. The design is clearly influenced by Belgian Art Nouveau and the style is similar to hoiuses built by Victor Horta and Paul Hanaker in Brussels. Like many other Szecesszió buildings in Budapest, the house fell into disrepair but has been beautifully restored. There are some “before and after” pictures on the museum’s website. The ground floor houses the museum, which contains many items of art nouveau style furniture, displayed in an eccentric, but engaging fashion, and a cafe. The other floors contain apartments. We visited the museum and the staff very very friendly, but were unable to provide much information about the history of the building.

This building, on the north side of Szent István tér, close to St Stephen’s Basillica, with it’s rounded bays minimal ornamentation, reminded me a little of the Hotel Tassel in Brussels, the fist Art Nouveau building, which was designed designed by Victor Horta.

We spotted the next building in a side street when we were walking up Kossuth Lajos Utca

I thought that this building, a former bank at No. 8 József Attila utca looked like a giant owl. It was designed by Artur Meinig and completed in 1898.

The Párizsi Nagy Áruház building on Andrássy Ut was designed by Zsigmond Sziklai,  as a department store and was completed in 1909. After renovation it re-opened the Alexandria book chain flag-ship store. The top floor houses a cafe with a magnificent neo-baroque painted ceiling. It’s lines are more geometric than most Art Nouveau buildings and in many ways has an Art Deco feel, even though that style only really developed after the First World War.

This building at 90 Dozsa Gyorgy Ut, just of Hero’s Aquare, has a very distinctive Eastern influenced style.

The following buildings were spotted on Széchenyi rakpart, north of the Houses of Parliament

These a just a few of the many hundreds of Art Nouveau style buildings in Budapest. See the following websites for more information on Art Nouveau in Budapest and Hungary and more pictures of buildings.

http://www.art-nouveau.hu/art.php?menuid=menu

http://inciarco.com/foros/showthread.php?t=4763

http://www.magyarszecessziohaza.hu/mainen.php

Jaume Plensa at the YSP

This was our fifth trip over the Pennines to the Yorkshire Sculpture Park in three years. It’s certainly become one of our favourite destinations for a cultural day trip. It’s well worth the journey as there is always plenty to see with frequently changing temporary exhibitions.

The current main exhibition showcases the work of the Catalan sculptor Jaume Plensa. (If you’re wondering how to pronounce his name, we had to ask, it’s Jaamer – like in pyjamas). He’s known over this side of the Pennines as the creator of the giant head overlooking the M62 near St Helens – “Dream”. Coincidentally, we’d seen one of his works a few weeks ago which was shown as part of the “Art on lake” exhibition in Budapest.

The other major exhibitions we’ve seen at the YSP mainly consisted of abstract works, most of Plensa’s sculptures are figurative – they feature the human body (or parts of it). Like Anthony Gormley, some of his pieces are based on his own body.  In particular, the collection of seated figures “hugging trees” – “The heart of trees” – displayed on the lawn in front of the Underground Gallery.

Some of his works, like “Dream” in St Helens are large scale. and this is reflected in the works displayed at the YSP. You can’t miss the two large heads, “Nuria and Irma”, located on top of the Underground Gallery. They’re very effective. Their construction, from quite fine wire mesh, means that they’re very nebulous. They’re there, but they’re not there – if that makes any sense. And although each of the heads is looking in one direction, their “gaze” seem to follow you as you walk around the Bothy garden.

There are giant heads inside the Underground Gallery too. “In the midst of dreams” consists of three large translucent heads, lit from the inside sat on large marble pebbles. They look like giants about to emerge from underground.

A number of his sculptures were constructed of metal letters and symbols from  other alphabets and languages welded together to form a human body sat down with the arms around the legs in a distinctive pose. The sculpture we’d seen in Budapest was another of these. There were four pieces of this type displayed at the YSP. One of them, “The tree of knowledge”, standing at the top of the Bothy Garden, is over eight metres high and is constructed so you can walk inside so the sky and surroundings can be viewed through the structure.

Words and language seems to be a major inspiration. They feature in a good number of the works. In some cases the sculptures are entirely made up of words and symbols. In other cases words and letters feature on the surface.

Unlike many other exhibitions where touching of sculptures displayed indoors isn’t allowed, and photographs forbidden, photography was permitted and you were actively encouraged to interact with some (but not all) of the works. As well as the “The tree of knowledge”, There are three works inside the Underground Gallery where interaction is possible. The long curtain of words – “Twenty-four Palms” consisting of lines from poems and texts that have inspired the artist – hanging in the concourse in the Underground Gallery, the two cabinets “Song of Songs I and II” which you can get inside, and the circle of large gongs (“Jerusalem”) installed in one of the galleries which visitors can hit (not too hard though!).

I think my favourite work was the collection of “Alabaster heads” displayed in the Underground Gallery. They were young female heads, distorted so that they are elongated (like the girl’s head in “Dream”). They were lit by spotlights with no background lighting and parts of the stone seemed to be fluorescent. They made a strong impression on me. In some ways the lighting made them look “spooky”, enhanced by the sound drifting in from the gongs being struck in the adjacent room and the tinkling produced by the visitors interacting with “The tree of knowledge” .  But they also invoked a feeling of peace and tranquillity.

The exhibition, which was due to finish in the autumn, has had its run extended into next year. I expect I’ll be going back. As well as the main exhibition there is a constantly changing programme of exhibitions in three other indoor galleries on the site and there are a large number of magnificent sculptures and structures displayed outdoors, including major works by Henry Moore and Barbara Hepworth.  With the opening of the nearby Hepworth Gallery in the town centre, Wakefield has become the “capital of sculpture”.

Hepworth Wakefield – The exhibition

Barbara Hepworth was born in Wakefield. She didn’t live there that long, moving down to London to study at the Royal College of Art when she was 0nly 17, she stayed down south, living in Hampstead and then St Ives. But the local Council are proud of the local girl who became one of the 20th Century’s major British artists and this new gallery in it’s landmark building that opened in May this year is devoted to her work.

The local Council had an enlightened approach to art and the original Wakefield Art Gallery, founded in 1923, built up a significant collection of contemporary art including works by Hepworth, Henry Moore (another local lad from Castleford, which is only a few miles away) and other leading British artists working during the 20th Century. The following short film produced by the Guardian gives a good brief overview of how the collection was built up.

Click here for Guardian video

Six of the ten galleries within the building are devoted to Barbara Hepworth, her work, influences and the St Ives School of which she was a leading member. There are also a number of sculptures outside the building in the pleasantly landscaped gardens.

The exhibits are drawn from the collection owned by Wakefield Council together with loans from the Tate and other sources. Although there are a number of works by Hepworth, the majority are by other artists from her circle and others who influenced her work.

In Gallery 1 there were 5 sculptures by Hepworth which attempted to show the range of her work. There were three wooden pieces, the “Cosdon Head” from 1949 carved from blue marble. I was less keen on the geometrically perfect “Cone and Sphere”  from 1973 made of white marble which I felt were were cold and somewhat sterile compared to the warmth and curvaceous forms of the wood.

She is particularly adept when working in wood where, as an advocate of being “true tot the materials” works with the natural contours. This is particularly true of the tall upright “Figure (Nanjizal)”  carved from yew. I particularly liked the indentations she made in the cavities she carved in the wood using her chisel, creating a pitted surface which contrasts with the smooth, polished outer surfaces.

Gallery 2 showed works from Wakefield’s collection including early sculptures and drawings by Hepworth and Henry Moore. It was particularly interesting to see the drawings. Of the paintings displayed I particularly liked those by John Piper, Patrick Heron, Francis Butterfield and Roger Fry.

The display in Gallery 3 was titled “Hepworth in Context” and included works by a significant number of British and European artists who had influenced Hepworth’s work. It provided an interesting overview of how British Art in the 20th Century became influenced by European Modernism leading to a move away from literal representations to more abstract work.

Galleries 4 and 5 were devoted to Hepworth’s work with plaster to create her bronze sculptures, made possible by the Hepworth Family Gift, a donation of a large number of working models. Gallery 4 explained her methods by examples of her work, visuals and videos,  with the majority of the models, some very large, displayed in Gallery 5.

Hepworth loved to carve and these displays showed how even the production of her bronze pieces she was able to incorporate carving by working on the plaster models used to produce the castings. In many of her bronze pieces the surface textures reflects this.

When she became an established artist Hepworth produced some very large bronze works for commissions for John Lewis, the Pepsi Corporation, the Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society and the United Nations. The displays included information on how all of these works were created. It was particularly fascinating to see the massive full scale model of the “Winged Figure”  commissioned by John Lewis for their Oxford Street Store in London. It dominated Gallery 5.

It was fascinating, and educative, to view the displays in these two galleries. I thought the Hepworth had done a good job in explaining how she worked and I certainly came away having learned about how  the bronze sculptures were created.

Hepworth is particularly associated with the St Ives where she lived from 1945 until her death in 1975. She was one of the central figures in the community of artists that gathered in the small Cornish seaside town leading to an explosion of innovative abstract art. In Gallery 6 there was a large collection of works from the St Ives School. I’ve never seen so many pieces from this significant group of artists displayed together. It was worth the trip over to Wakefield for this alone.

There are three works by Hepworth displayed outdoors. Leaning over the end of the bridge leading up to the gallery from the car park you can see three figures from the “Family of man” series of bronze sculptures, from 1970. The whole group can be seen displayed very effectively at the Yorkshire Sculpture Park only a few miles outside the town.

You can also see her  “Ascending Form (Gloria)” from 1958 and “Hollow form with Inner form” (1968). There’s a plaster prototype of the latter in Gallery 5 and it was interesting to compare the two. The inner form was positioned slightly differently in the final version. I think Hepworth must have changed her mind when she’d tried out her ideas in creating the plaster model and I felt that the final bronze was an improvement.

Also outside is a large wooden structure, “The Black Cloud”, created by Heather and Ivan Morrison. Its a cross between sculpture and architecture – – a type of artistic tent or gazebo, intended to be used a a “multi-functional social space ….. an outdoor shelter for people to gather, relax, entertain and enjoy the waterfront location”. It’s an interesting piece with which visitors can interact. It does seem to be in a vulnerable location and I do hope it doesn’t become vandalised.

The Hepworth also has 4 other rooms that are for temporary exhibitions. These were taken up with “Hot Touch”, an exhibition of works by by the Irish sculptor Eva Rothschlild. I found it interesting. I liked some, but not all of her pieces. But I’ve rabbited on enough in  this post already. So that’s probably a topic for another post.

The Hepworth Wakefield – Architecture

The Hepworth art gallery in Wakefield was opened in May this year. We finally got round to visiting it yesterday. It’s the largest new gallery since Tate St Ives in 1993 and cost £35m to build. The local Labour Council of this rugby league loving, working class town hope that the project will help to regenerate a run-down area of the town centre – in the way the Guggenheim in Bilbao revitalised that industrial city. Unfortunately, given the economic situation and the way the Tory/Liberal coalition are viciously cutting back on public spending, it’s unlikely that we’ll see anything similar built for a long time. Culture for the masses isn’t seen as a priority for a government led by and serving the privileged elite.

The Hepworth was designed by David Chipperfield Architects, who were awarded the contract after winning a RIBA international competition launched by Wakefield Council.  The design has met with some mixed reviews, particularly about its external appearance as it is constructed of grey pigmented concrete.

It was interesting to be able to see the building particularly after watching the third and final programme in the Channel 4 programme “The Secret Life of Buildings” last Monday. This episode considered buildings used for leisure, including museums and galleries, and one of the key points the presenter, Tom Dyckhoff, made, was that starting with the Guggenheim, museums are often designed as “individualistic, flashy, narcissistic icons” which are often not well suited to their purpose. In other words the “form” of the building is everything and the “function” is of lesser importance.  The building itself becomes the work of art and the architect neglects the need for it to work as a successful space to display works of art.

For me a for a building design to be successful, it must first achieve its intended function and be attractive. Although not everyone may agree, I think Chipperfield’s Hepworth achieves both of these objectives.

Of course, modern architecture always has a mixed reception. So, not unsurprisingly, perhaps, the Hepworth’s design is not universally popular.

“Relentlessly grey – as though the image of the North isn’t grey enough already – it has been likened to a collection of sloping sheds, a bunker, a prison and a secret-police headquarters.” (Yorkshire Post)

However, with some possible reservations about the colour, I like it.

The design is relatively simple. There is very little in the way of ornamentation. It consists of ten interlinked, irregularly shaped and ridged boxes. The lines of the building are all straight – there are no curves, but it is not monotonous, The placing of the “boxes” break up structure and the roofs slope.

The exterior surfaces are grey with a purplish tinge. Its made of pigmented concrete in a return to the “Brutalism” of the 60’s and 70’s. Many of those buildings have not stood the test of time. Bare concrete does not always bear the ravages of the British climate, becoming stained and crumbling. One difference is that the earlier style was to use rough concrete surfaces, the Hepworth’s are smooth. I think that makes a big difference.

Although at the moment the surfaces are clean and pristine, we’ll have to see how well it lasts. I also worry about how long it will be before graffiti appears on the walls. I hope they’re easy to clean.

I wonder whether a lighter, more cheerful colour might have been more appropriate. Grey can be depressing. However, I didn’t find the colour unappealing even though it was rather a grey day when we visited. Surface colour changes with lighting conditions, and I’d like to see how it looked on one of those rare days when the skies are blue and the sun is shining.

The gallery sits on a bend of River Calder, next to a weir and it’s waterside setting enhances the building. This location has also helped to make the building “environmentally friendly” as the river’s flow has been utilised to provide the majority of the heating and cooling. The approach from the car-park (which is too small) is over a curving bridge which crosses the Calder and the initial view emphasises the jagged, angular design.

 

Overall, then, I found the building attractive – but what about how well it fulfils it’s function?

The entrance leads into a large, airy lobby. Off this there is the obligatory book shop and cafe, toilets, administrative offices and an educational room. A wide staircase leads up into the gallery space. There are a number of bright, white rooms, of various sizes and shapes determined by the individual trapezoid blocks. They are not simply cuboid, but many of them have sloping ceilings.  The rooms were flooded with natural light from a number of large windows and from  carefully placed skylights that create “wells” of light.  I felt they were excellent spaces for displaying art. The windows allow views of the surroundings – not all of them attractive. But it is pleasant to look out over the river if the. A window has been provided on one side of the building to allow visitors to look out at the medieval Gothic Chantry chapel and the old medieval bridge over the Calder. It’s a pity that the ugly modern road bridge obstructs the view.

So for me, the building is a success. It works well as a gallery while being interesting and attractive. I expect I’ll be going back again to see exhibitions here again in the future. It will be interesting to see how the building stands the test of time.

Peter Randall-Page in Wigan

We popped in yesterday to he Drumcroon Gallery in Wigan to look at the exhibition ‘Showing his Hand’ of smaller works by Peter Randall-Page, a well established British sculptor who has produced some significant works.  A number are on public display in various cities across the UK, including London, Edinburgh, Bristol, Oxford and Cambridge and abroad. He created a major granite sculpture, “Seed”, for the Eden Centre in Cornwall.

I first discovered his work when I visited his major exhibition at the Yorkshire Sculpture Park a couple of years ago. We also came across one of his sculptures, ‘Give and Take’, when we visited Newcastle.

‘Give and Take’

According to his website he has

“….. always been informed and inspired by the study of organic form and its subjective impact on our emotions.”

and many of his works certainly are influenced by nature, particularly plants and seeds. This was reflected in the works on display at the Drumcroon.

My favourite was the two “Mind Map” pieces. These are made up of  fragments of fired brick clay . The individual pieces are split in two and after they are fired are used to create symmetrical abstract patterns on the wall  by locating the paired slabs on either side of the central axis. The firing of the clay produces interesting variations in the colours of the slabs .

I’d seen some of his “Mind Map” pieces at the YSP exhibition and the accompanying booklet explained how he had developed the idea by studyingEgg drawings by the Greek mathematician Euclid (c.300BC) whose “Elements” is the earliest known treatise dedicated to geometry. Euclid set out a system for creating compass and straight edge constructions, including egg shapes made up of intersecting lines and circles. Euclid’sinfluence can be clearly seen in these “Mind Maps”  and also in some of the drawings in the exhibition

These symmetrical egg drawings had been produced by applying the paint or ink and folding over the paper to create something similar to a Rorschach inkblot. He used this approach for a good number of the paper based works on show in the exhibition.

There were a number of small sculptures on display. I liked the small metal castings displayed on the mantlepiece in one of the rooms. They were minature versions of a larger sculpture we’d seen at the YSP and were possiblly maquettes – small scale models used by sculptors when trying out their ideas – which would be scaled up later.

I wasn’t so keen on the clay pieces on display. They had an unfinished appearance.

There were a number of maquettes, including one for “Seed”, in a glass case,

and a selection of his sketch books were also displayed.

I found these particularly interesting as they give an insight into the creative process and the way the artist’s ideas are conceived and developed.

I thought that this was a good exhibition, well worth a visit for anyone with an interest in contemporary sculpture. Wigan are lucky to have the opportunity to show the works.  However, it has been very poorly publicised and I wonder how many people know that it’s there? As I’ve noted before, Wigan Councilare very poor at promoting the Arts. The Drumcroon is the only arts facility in Wigan, but is mainly used as a resource for schools. Sadly, the centre is under threat due to Council cutbacks. If it goes Wigan will be even more of a cultural wasteland than it is at the moment. We can only cast our eyes with envy towards enlightened towns like Wakefield (another solid working class community with a passion for rugby league) where the new Hepworth gallery, a major new facility devoted to sculpture, opened earlier this year.

Art on the Lake in Budapest

One day, during our recent visit to Budapest we visited the Museum of Fine Arts on Hero’s Square. After our visit, as it was a beautiful day, we decided to take a stroll through the nearby city park. Walking along the shore of the lake which is a major feature in the north west corner of the park, we noticed a number of structures in the water. Taking a closer look we discovered that they were art works which were part of an exhibition “Art on Lake” organised by the Museum of Fine Arts to celebrate Hungary’s turn to chair the Council of the European Union during the first six months of 2011.

The exhibition consists of sculptures by 25 contemporary artists from EU member countries, including Hungary. This might not seem that unusual – the twist is that the sculptures are surrounded by water in the lake.

The museums and galleries in Budapest charge an entry fee, but this exhibition was free. We were able to view the sculptures by walking along the shore of the lake and w stopped for a while and had a coffee and cake in the pleasant lakeside cafe on the western shore (very reasonable prices). We discovered that it was possible to get up even closer to the sculptures by hiring a small boat, so we took the opportunity to do this. This allowed us to gain a different perspective by getting up close and also by looking at them from different angles.

Atlantis by Tea Mäkipää

I particularly liked this aspect of the exhibition as it allowed the viewers to interact with the art – so long as you took care not to fall into the water! It also meant that you weren’t continually watched by over-vigilant invigilators, like in the indoor museums and galleries.

Apparently the exhibits are floodlit during the evening after dark, and some of the works have internal or external lights incorporated into them. It would have been good to visit during when it was dark, but unfortunately by the time we found out about this it was too late as we were due to return home.

Water-sail Statue by Günther Uecker

As with any exhibition of this nature, I liked some of the works better than others, but they were all of a very high standard. Some had been created especially for the exhibition while others had previously been displayed on dry lad. The setting in the water added interest even though the lake was too murky and rough to allow any reflections.

Late Departure, Early Arrival by Balázs Kicsiny

One of the sculptures (Soul XII) was by Jaume Plesna, who currently has a major exhibition showing at the Yorkshire Sculpture Park, which we visited shortly after our return to England. It was one of his figures constructed from metal letters of which there are a number on show at the YSP. I think setting it in the water certainly added something to the work.

Soul XII by Jaume Plesna

Some of the works were very simple, like these deer (“Paradise now”)  by  Krištof KINTERA constructed from a metal barrier and a few metal tubes. I thought it was very effective. The use of everyday materials used in a different context reminded me of a work by Picasso where he used a bicycle seat and handlebars to create the head of a bull.

Paradise now  by  Krištof KINTERA

Waiting by Erik Binder. Everyday objects in an “alien” setting. Maybe not to everyone’s taste but I liked this. The lamp is lit up at night and I think that would enhance the work.

K.M. Column-fountain by Krzysztof M. Bednarski

Bonhomme by Daniel Knorr. Like a snowman, but constructed from stones.

Bird by Magdalena Abakanowicz

Rounded Loop by Kelemen Zénó

Impressions of Budapest

We’ve just got back from a short break in Budapest. It was our first visit to the city – and our first foray into Eastern Europe. It was an enjoyable break. These are my general impressions.

The city

• A beautiful city which reminded me of Paris in many ways, at least on the Pest side of the river, with buildings of uniform height on tree lined boulevards, a cafe culture (but with more emphasis on cakes!).
• Two cities in one – the older Buda on the hills on the west bank of the Danube and Pest on the east bank – linked by a number of bridges.
• It had a safe, relaxing atmosphere.
• Lots of things to see and do – we weren’t able to see everything we would have liked to during our 4 day visit.
• It was less busy than other popular “tourist cities” such as Paris, London and Barcelona – fewer pedestrians and less traffic and fewer tourists.
• Relatively small – most of the sights are in a relatively compact area – less spread out than Paris and London
• Good, and cheap, public transport system – trams, buses, trolley buses and underground.
• Less obvious poverty visible on the streets than in many other cities (especially London and Paris), but its difficult to know how representative the central touristy areas are compared to the city as a whole.

The people

• Fluent English spoken in cafes, restaurants and most touristy places. Widespread use of English on tourist information (leaflets and even street signs) on public transport
• Very friendly and helpful in our hotel and all the cafes and restaurants we visited.
• Less friendly in shops – often quite frosty
• Although some of the staff in the museums and state owned attractions were friendly, the majority were very frosty and some very officious.
• I sensed a nostalgia for a more aggressive, imperial past. There were lots of statues of aggressive kings and warriors and there were a number of references from tourist guides and in tourist information to the times when Hungary was a larger country .

Eating Out

• Plenty of good value restaurants.
• Food generally very good
• Emphasis on meat – and more meat.
• 10% tips expected. May be included on bill (always check – ask if not clear). Don’t leave tip on table but tell waiter how much to add to bill when they bring it.

Architecture

• Mixture of styles, reflecting the history and development of the city
• The Pest side of the city developed during the 19th and early 20th century and the architecture is a mixture of styles representative of that period – neo-classical, neo-gothic, neo-renaissance and art nouveau, with a smattering of art-deco and modernist buildings.
• Relatively few post WW2 buildings and very few modern ones (1990’s to 21st Century) in the city centre.
• Lots of interesting art nouveau style (Secessionist) buildings scattered all over Pest.
• Some of the “older” medieval buildings and structures are not as old as they first appear – the popular “Fisherman’s Bastion” was actually built during the late 1800’s.
• Flying into the city we were able to see the large estates of Brutalist tower blocks in the wider conurbation. Of course, these are well outside the areas tourists visit.

Museums and Galleries

• Plenty of museums and galleries dotted around the city.
• Complex pricing structure for entry into the various temporary exhibitions
• Staff – see above.
• Excessive attention from the staff in the galleries – you were continually watched and followed. A hangover from the old Communist days.
• The majority seemed to be somewhat behind Western Europe in the way they were organised. For example,  the displays were not always curated imaginatively, there were no guide books on the collections available, information on the displays was minimal and
• In most cases the gift shops had very little available to purchase (applies to both information and souvenirs). The Pure Arts Museum, which had a well stocked shop, was the exception to this.