Two Radically Different Exhibits at the Getty Museum

¶ … Getty Museum

Before making plans to personally visit the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, I spent an hour or so researching the museum, Mr. Getty, and some of the issues that this richest of all art museums had recently faced. The assignment calls for finding out what is available to see, and I also found out what was not available to see. One important statue that I would have liked to have viewed was the ancient Greek "goddess of love," Aphrodite, that that iconic statue had been repatriated back to Italy in 2011. My research also showed that the trend for museums that have antiquities on display is to return those art pieces to their rightful countries, if they were purchased from dealers who either stole them or bought them from thieves. In fact the Getty Museum has given back 47 pieces in the last few years (the Metropolitan Museum in New York has given back 21). This has enormous historical significance because these treasures belong to the countries and the people in those countries, and it is an international crime to smuggle them out, or to buy them from someone who did smuggle them or otherwise obtained them through illegal means.

My Visit to the Getty Museum

Meanwhile, on a recent Tuesday afternoon I rode the tram up the steep hill to the Getty, which is a shining building on top a hill overlooking the ocean to the west and the City of Los Angeles to the south.

I walked through the halls and into the large high ceiling rooms that were crowded with visitors, and viewed several works of art that I really was drawn to -- but they were created before 1600, so they didn't qualify for this paper. However, I do have to explain that I truly enjoyed a painting by Flemish artist Lieven van Lathen ("Romance of Gillion de Trazegnies"). Three friars are pointing to a passage in a book, perhaps a Bible, and a man with a red hat looking not at the friars but at something above them (1464). The impression a viewer gets is that the friars were trying to point out something important in that book (probably the Bible) but the man in the tall red hat had higher aspirations.

Another painting I was attracted to was "The Crucifixion," a beautiful, stunning painting of Christ on the cross that was painted by Giuliano Amadei in the 15th century. I don't generally like drawings or paintings of Jesus Christ being murdered on the cross, but this one was very interesting because at the bottom of the main picture there is another smaller painting of a group of people apparently carrying the deceased savior to what they apparently thought would be his final resting place. On either side of the main drawing are smaller images of people who might be his disciples except that there are just ten of them.

Exhibition -- The Scandalous Art of James Ensor

This Belgium painter had a wild imagination and was obviously going against the grain and marching to his own drummer because his paintings were radical and bizarre. The description of his life reflects that he was an international celebrity at the end of his career, but when he was younger he was provocative and created scandals. Looking at his art work one can easily see why he made waves and created scandals.

I spent perhaps twenty or thirty minutes looking at this exhibition. I had never seen art so gross and even scary. I guess the bold outrageousness of his work made me want to see more of it and understand where he was coming from, although I did not accomplish those plans.

"The Man of Sorrows" -- which was painted in 1891, oil on panel -- is the most hideous painting of Jesus Christ there could ever be. Christ has his crown of thorns but his face looks like someone threw sulfuric acid on him. His forehead bulges out in odd shapes, his eyes make him look like he is on some toxic drug, there are lesions on his skin, hair grows out of the sides of his nose and his mouth is open as though to say something. Perhaps he was supposed to be saying, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do…" His hair and beard are stringing and greasy-looking. All in all, it is a frightening and grotesque painting of Christ.

On the subject of paintings that are grotesque, Ensor's "Doctrinal Nourishment" is that and more. He is known to have been politically radical, and in this etching he has five figures seated on what appears to be a wall, with their backs to what appears to be a multitude of citizens, all below the wall. And out of the anus of each figure (one with a crown; one with a religious cap of some kind) is pouring some kind of substance that certainly looks nasty. Out of the butt of the figure with the religious headgear looks like a snake.

Out of the anus of the figure with the crown (likely supposed to be king or queen) it appears to be a long snake-like thing. What could the meaning be in this image? The political and religious leaders are "pooping" on the public? Certainly seems to be the case, although that is speculation on my part. "Doctrinal Nourishment" indeed! In other words, the only nourishment people in Belgium received from their leadership was, well, shit. It is true that there was a great deal of political violence and social upheaval in Belgium in the late 19th century; that may explain it. Because the artist was apparently responding to the political unrest (and corruption) in Belgium at that time, the painting has strong historical context.