In the Menil Collection located in Houston, Texas, the museum holds pieces of art by Joan Miro in both surrealist exhibit and the modern art exhibit. With “Untitled” (1933) being located in the surrealist exhibit and “The Magic of Color” (1930) located in the modern art exhibit both pieces of artwork are treated differently despite both being by the same artist. Depending on the work Joan Miro puts out his artwork may be treated differently within the art community due to the subject matter.
Within the Surrealism exhibit in the Menil Collection is Joan Miro’s 1933 piece of art “Untitled”. Around 1933 surrealism was still a very new style of art that hadn’t been understood by the public masses yet. Due to this, most surrealist works were not accepted during the time frame they were originally released in. In the Menil Collection the surrealist exhibit tends to have darker, and still neutral, colored walls. The wall color choice could say many things. One option is that the darker walls allow for the color in the surrealist works to come through better than if they were on a white wall.
The second option would be that the darker colored walls could represent the darkness in the unconscious. The unconscious is a big deal as it is the inspiration behind surrealist artwork. Lastly the final option behind the dark wall colors is. That the Menil Collection might be making a statement about art in. Which Modern and Contemporary. Art are the shining stars of recent art while surrealist art is the art that deserves to be hidden away for no one to notice. Connecting the backdrops back to Miro, what this can say about him is that while his art that is considered Modern and Contemporary is shining in the white backdropped room, his work that is considered surrealist is shunned and is left to remain in the darkness as if to hide his other styles of work.
While Joan Miro’s “Untitled” is located in the Surrealist exhibit there’s another famous artist located in the exhibit that could shed light on the difference in treatment. Rene Magritte is a surrealist artist who didn’t receive his fame until much later in his career. It is worth mentioning him because the Menil collection contains many of his works. The primary piece by Rene Magritte that will be compared to Miro’s “Untitled” is “Golconda (Golconde)” which was painted in 1953.
This particular piece was chosen to highlight the differences between surrealism in the 1930’s and in the 1950’s. While both Miro and Magritte were creating surrealist art in the 1930’s it is Miro who gains more attention due to his more abstract style. Magritte’s work tends to have realistic work in a surrealist setting and that has never changed, yet his work became more noticeable due to the rise in pop art. Surrealism in the 1930’s was new, strange, and perhaps innovative. Surrealism by the 1950’s something that audiences have been exposed to which led it to not be as strange and far more acceptable to the public along with the art community.
Magritte, through his work “Golconda”, shows the viewers what they had already seen by the 1950’s in surrealism which is a repetition of the same figure, the dreamlike aspect of the man (or men) floating in the air, and giving something with non human characteristics literal human characteristics which in the case of Magritte’s painting is changing the raindrops into raining men. Miro on the other hand was showing off concepts and techniques not seen before by the public through “Untitled”.
While a piece of art like “Untitled” may not have been accepted early on, it eventually became something that was accepted as more people began to appreciate his style of work, whereas Magritte had work that was ignored for the longest time as other artists stood out better, yet when he had his moment the art he created wasn’t much different from surrealist work before him. As it stands whether Miro is being compared to other surrealist artists or not, his artwork in the surrealist exhibit is treated as if it needs to remain hidden. By placing off in a comer in a dark room that only exemplifies that the style of “Untitled” isn’t as significant or worth looking at in comparison to anything in the Modern and Contemporary exhibit.
In the Modern and Contemporary art exhibit is Joan Miro’s painting “The Magic of Color” which was created in 1930. As with Miro’s “Untitled”, “The Magic of Color” fell into the same issue during its time period due to how new surrealism was and how more modern art was also beginning to flourish. The painting itself consists of a creamish colored canvas with 3 almost circles; a large red, almost circle, a smaller yellow, almost circle, and a much smaller and closer to a perfect black circle. While all the circles (or almost circles) are on the canvas, none of them manage to touch each other leaving each shade of color its own vicinity of space. “The Magic of Color” in the space that it compliments its surroundings which could be seen as both a positive and a negative thing.
In the positive regard Miro’s painting complimenting the space it’s in can mean that this style of art has made enough of an impact to create others that want to follow in the abstract expressionism style. Seeing as how it was a huge movement, it would make sense that many works in the 20th century and still in the 21 century continue to follow the inspiration that abstract expressionism continues to create. In this regard “The Magic of Color” can be seen as a pioneer in the genre of art and one that innovates art for the time period in which it was created. Without “The Magic of Color” or Joan Miro the surrealist genre in the abstract expressionism world would be lost.
Along the lines of a negative regard “The Magic of Color” complementing its surroundings could mean that the piece of art has no defining characteristic to allow it to stand out on its own. For someone to go in the exhibit without the knowledge of art and see that painting compared to other works they might think that all the work could easily have been done by the same person thus making Miro’s painting no different from the likes of a Rothko painting for example.
In the art world, it can typically be assumed that an artist wants to stand out from their peers, so with the Menil collection highlighting similar works, it can leave the viewer with the impression that all Modern and Contemporary art is the same and that the techniques are repetitive. In the context of art itself a museum highlighting this story could leave the viewers with the mindset that this genre of art is dried up and unoriginal. That concept can ultimately destroy how the art is viewed. No longer is “The Magic of Color” viewed as an important piece that Joan Miro created rather it becomes just another abstract painting that no one can understand in a field full of other artwork that is similar.
As previously mentioned Mark Rothko was used as an example to compare his work to that of Joan Miro. The best Rothko piece to compare to Miro’s “The Magic of Color” is the 1957 painting, “Untitled”. In “Untitled” it is simply different shades of red rectangular shapes along a red background. This piece is worth comparing due to the usage of shapes and the color red. In Rothko’s painting the focus is mainly on one color in many shades while in Miro’s it explored multiple colors in one shade.
What either painting is trying to get across is unclear, however even though Rothko’s painting came out after Miro’s painting both create a timeless enough effect to where the viewer could believe both paintings came out around the same time. In the case of Miro being in the Modern and Contemporary art exhibit it is safe to say that Miro is simply like other artists (or since Miro came first other artists are like him). Good or bad in either case Miro’s voice isn’t as amplified in “The Magic of Color” within the Modern and Contemporary art exhibit.
Joan Miro as an artist has made many works that could qualify under both Surrealism and Modern and Contemporary art. The Menil Collection highlights some of his work under both exhibits to further emphasize this point. While “The Magic of Color” appears as though it fits well in the Modem and Contemporary exhibit it can be questioned if whether it fits in too well.
Meanwhile “Untitled” can stand out on its own as a surrealist piece of art, but gets shunned into the darkness as if surrealism was taboo. From the surface, it appears as though Miro gets treated better in the Modern and Contemporary exhibit due to its surroundings whereas Miro’s art is treated poorly in the Surrealism exhibit. Digging deeper it can be noticed that perhaps both are treated the same, but in different aspects, whether its due to the wall color, history, or the type of art itself.
