Art journal #1: Met Museum NY

(Nov 2, 2008) My earlier recollection of Met is a boring old institution. I went again this time – mostly because I woke up early due to jet lag and had no other places to go (went to Central Park first already; but first museum worth visiting – Guggenhim, opens at 10am, and MOMA at 1030am, but Met opens at 930am!). To my surprise, I loved my Met trip. First the range of collection is mind blowing. I know where the British Museum collection came from (they stole it!), but America has only been around for 200 years – and the amount of 14-15th century European painting, Ming Dynasty vase, 700 year-old Buddhist relics that the Met has is amazing. I was later told by someone that the Americans started loading up on art around beginning of the last century, afraid that the “Japanese will destroy it all” (not verified). Almost every item came from a fund, or a donation. There's a real culture of donating to museums (apparently helped by 100% tax claim credit in US). But that's nice, and we don't have in HK. To be sure, the European paintings still didn't engage, neither did the Ming/Qi vases. But there were more than a few bright spots in the vast Met.“The Montebello Years” exhibition was fascinating. This is the curator that worked for the Met for like 3 decades. And it's a show that was put up as as tribute to him as he leaves for a teaching post. The exhibition showed all the stuff he acquired during his tenure. It makes you wonder what curatorial and art history knowledge you'd need to amass such a diverse, wonderful collection. Loved the (small) contemporary art section too. I am in love with Pollock. Heart racing when standing in front of it. Truly a master (funny, beginning to like abstract art like this). Shocked to see Zhang Huan is included in the comtemporary art section and "validated" by Met already, its just a 2007 ash painting. Pace Gallery have done a great push, clearly