Minneapolis Institute of Art: “Seeking a Truth” Exhibition
The Minneapolis Institute of Art (MIA) is a central art museum within the popular walkways of the Twin Cities hub. Within its grand walls lays a cultivated accumulation of artwork across a span of timelines, cultures, and movements. Among the many galleries, the temporary exhibition “Seeking a Truth: German Art of the 1920s and 1930s,” stands prominent in correspondence with many art movements and humanistic themes. The undertaken critique will center on both the connections of the temporary German art exhibition and the functions of MIA as an entire entity.
“Seeking a Truth: German Art of the 1920s and 1930s”
Albert Braun with Mirror, 1928
The exhibition “Seeking a Truth: German Art of the 1920s and 1930s,” was widely focused on German artists after the nation’s defeat in World War I and their contrasting ideologies with the rise of Nazism. August Sander, a German photographer of the time was highlighted among several other artists, all of whom were against the rising governmental power of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi Party) in the 1920s. Many of the art pieces, both photographs and paintings, depicted contrasting principles against the core ideology of Nazism. Due to this, many of the artists were considered “degenerates” by the Nazis and persecuted for their beliefs.
Gypsy, 1930
“August” was a film created by Omer Fast, which portrayed a blind and lonely August Sander in the last legs of his life. The entire fifteen minute video reflected upon his life and career in photography during the Weimar Republic and Nazi Germany. The focus was on the idea of his neutrality and impartiality in his photography; he photographed well-known Nazi members as well as those considered “degenerates,” like gypsies.
AIZ (Arbeiter-Illustrierte-Zeitung) magazine cover
The exhibition also examined artists of Dadaism, a very confusing art movement that seemingly and purposefully contradicted itself. The entirety of the movement was anti-authoritative, opposing both order and definition during the critical period after the brutalities of World War I. The broad goals of the movement surrounded the overturn of the bourgeois notions that embodied the art world at the time; the development both questioned the role of the artist and the motivations of art. Many of the artists in the exhibit exemplified traits of Dadaism in their search for irrationalities outside of the aftermaths of war.
Overall, the “Seeking a Truth: German Art of the 1920s and 1930s” reflected the timeline well in terms of the avant garde artists who were active at the time. It was very interesting to view the opposing end of Nazism through the lens of German artists themselves. During a time of nationalism and chaos, indicating radical beliefs against the Nazi ideals would have been very dangerous. The bravery and determination of the German artists, including the impartiality of August Sanders, was very apparent in many of the displayed works. The entire exhibit was well curated, and the torch of valor for the radical, anti-Nazist artists was well-established.
The Entirety of MIA:
As a whole, the Minneapolis Institute of Art fit incredibly well within the criteria of a traditional art museum. As noted by Daniel Buren, MIA fit the three museum roles of aesthetic, economic, and mystical qualities (Buren 189). The museum was aesthetic in presenting a central viewing place for many of the art pieces; authentic originals as well as renowned copies were posted within a single area for people to look at. MIA was also economically inclined; as the primary location for displaying artwork, the museum gave value to each displayed piece. In buying and renting selective pieces from exclusive sellers and collectors, MIA helped fuel the economic empire behind the world of art. In terms of mysticality, MIA also elevated each of its art pieces to an automatic “art” status. Museums like MIA display their pieces in a way that exemplified the caliber of art, absolving any question of their positions as qualified pieces of art.
MIA was designed with the intention of presenting and preserving the pieces within its walls. As a main function of a museum, one of MIA’s unspoken aims is the preservation of art. As Buren points out, museums are designed with the task of emphasizing the “illusion of eternity” by “artificial means to preserve the work, as much as possible, from the effects of time” (Buren 190). MIA protects art within the span of many eras; the oldest eras of native works to modern contemporary pieces are all included within its massive embrace against time.
Buren also critiqued the placement of art as crucial within a museum. MIA delegates its pieces in both the presentation of solo exhibits and artists as well as within the combination of art eras and styles. While MIA does exemplify modern artists within singular, temporary exhibitions, this is only a very small section of the museum. One of the downfalls of many art museums, MIA being a prime example, is the mixing of crucial ethnic pieces of art. East Asian art is clumped in a corner, Native African in one, and Western art in another; there have been many criticisms about this type of organization. The divisions between gallery sections and the combination of different cultural pieces results in a segregated and discriminatory sense of viewing.
Overall, the Minneapolis Institute of Art and the “Seeking a Truth: German Art of the 1920s and 1930s” exhibition were both exemplary places of visitation. The museum itself embodied such a vast collection of works; although the layout could be better, the art pieces more than made up for the poor divisions. The German art exhibition was also interesting in turning the modern focal point of Nazi Germany inside out, exposing the radicalities of anti-Nazist artists. The museum and the exclusive exhibition were both highlights of a well-traveled trip.
Buren, Daniel. “Function of the Museum.” Theories in Contemporary Art, edited by Richard Hertz, Prentice Hall, 1985, pp. 189–192.
