Acrylic cityscapes at Maplewood, 9707 Old Georgetown Rd, Bethesda.  February 10-  April  7, 2013.  


One is blown away when coming upon Monderer’s “East River” paintings in the small area, which serves as a gallery at Maplewood.  The panoramic view consists of five canvases. The viewer not only sees the sweep of the river, but is drawn in by the vibrancy of the scene.  The artist uses color in a bold, forthright manner. 

Monderer’s choice of scene ranges from the large, over-views to the up-close look at shops.  Above the colorful stores, we delight in the all-over pattern created by open and closed windows. One dramatic scene is captured in “Under the Westside Highway”.  The stark contrast between the shadowy blacks under the highway, and the sun-blanched buildings on the other side of the street demonstrate the artist’s grasp of composition.

Monderer paints from photographed scenes.  When comparing some of the photographs to the paintings, we see how the artist pulls another aspect into the scene before us.  Stressing some areas and omitting others, she injects her experience to make a coherent arrangement.

 Monderer’s cityscapes are alive: there is a great  the appreciation for the sculptural dynamic and the colors that make up a metropolis.

It’s hard to say why one retrospective appeals to me while another does not.  The Gensken exhibit was certainly interesting, but, with the exception of a few pieces, nothing really elicited much of a reaction.  I’ll start with the few works that did appeal to me.

The large tableau at the entrance to the exhibit was the most powerful work in the whole exhibit for me (my wife disagrees, but she didn’t like anything in the exhibit).  The photos below don’t really capture the eerie other-worldly feeling evoked by this tableau of mannequins in very strange outfits.  It is a very large tableau, taking up as much as a 30 ft square space.

In the exhibit itself there were various areas where works from different phases  in the artist’s progression are shown.  I will ignore most of these and only concentrate on a few I thought worthy of comment.

Gensken was very interested in architecture.  Not only her famous/infamous “Fuck the Bauhaus” work speaks to that interest, but there were also pieces dealing solely with structure and foundation.  Here is one example from an era in modern German architecture when unadorned concrete was in vogue.

It’s very hard to understand the commentary of this piece without the commentary provided by the MOMA curators. It was, like many other pieces in the exhibit, something interesting but also very forgettable.

Here are a two photos from “Fuck the Bauhaus”.

Another piece that I liked was the hanging, distorted metal tools and utensils.  (My photo dos not really convey the impact of this piece.)  I can’t really put into words why I liked this piece, but it was one of the few that stood out for me.

Gensken lived in the U.S. (mostly in NYC I think) for several years.  Like many others, she saw the dark side of the Disney world as shown here.

She was in NYC  on 9/11.  She made several pieces to evoke the feelings from that horrible disaster.  The exhibit features two in which she has created  a sculpture  likeness of a part of the inside of the passenger section of a commercial airliner.  

I’m sure this piece has evoked strong reactions among some who viewed the exhibit.  However, once again, I found the piece “flat” in some sense – it was very obvious and did not leave any deep impression afterwards.

Karen and I have spent a fair amount of time discussing and debating what makes an exhibit powerful  and what does not.  In all fairness to Isa Gensken, we had never heard of her before this exhibit even though she is well known in Germany.  So, it’s not like seeing an exhibit of pieces that are new for you from an artist you are already familiar with.  But, this would seem to make it even more imperative to give the viewer the full breadth of the artist’s work.  I can only assume that the MOMA curators assiduously attempted to do just that, which leaves me with the impression of an artist who dabbled in many areas but did not pursue any of them seriously.

                                                                                       -Doug Hilmer



ED:  Here are links to other responses to the exhibition and to an excellent video prepared by MOMA.

Roberta Smith:    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/22/arts/design/isa-genzken-retrospective-at-museum-of-modern-art.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0

Peter Schjeldahl: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/artworld/2013/12/02/131202craw_artworld_schjeldahl

Video link:  
This excellent short video includes installations views of previous exhibitions, some works not included in the MOMA show and interview sound bites that elucidate the Genzken’s approach and the resulting body of work .  The dynamic of the video adds what is missing in the exhibition, the balletic and dynamic elements that in many cases are lost in the completion and static display of the final sculptural event.     http://www.moma.org/visit/calendar/exhibitions/1345?overlay=isa.288.1364