"The Shape of Dreams" at the Dali Museum - A Hybrid Exhibit

"The Fire" by Paul Delvaux (1945)(Oil on canvas)

Maggie and I have a tradition of touring the Dali Museum whenever she visits. And so we dutifully trekked up to St. Pete to check out the current special exhibit on display -- "The Shape of Dreams." It turned out to be extremely interesting, although not for the reasons the Museum had in mind. 

A sign posted at the entry of the exhibit contained the usual "no flash" notice as well as a heads up that "The Western tradition of art includes paintings of figures without clothing." Hmm. This was new, but our world is changing. Duly warned, I was prepared when the first work we encountered was chock full of naked women (and a couple of naked men). 

Paul Delvaux was a Belgian painter known for his dreamlike works created in a realistic manner. To me, this painting had a cult-like feel as the women line up to approach the man reclining in the center of the image. The woman on the right grasps a curtain, although it's unclear whether she's pushing it back to allow us in or readying herself to pull it closed for a private ceremony. Death, of course, looms in the form of the skeleton. 

"Delusions of Grandeur II" by Rene Magritte (1948)

Interesting, but what's the connection to dreams? A wall card explained that this portion of the exhibit dealt with the "source" of dreams. Delvaux' "The Fire" apparently deals with "the internal mind working through repressed fear and desire." The work is owned by the St. Louis Museum of Art, which notes in its description that the work is a response by the artist to the traumatic impact of WWII on his country. That bit of information would have been of interest when considering the work, but I wasn't the curator. 

A work by Magritte seems a good choice for an exhibit on the nature of dreams. There is definitely something other-worldly about his work. But here's where it really gets interesting. "Delusions of Grandeur II" and many of the other paintings "in" the exhibit were not actually on display. Instead, high quality prints of the paintings were affixed to walls and support beams and interspersed among actual paintings. What the heck was going on? 

"Portrait and a Dream" by Jackson Pollock (1953)

I will quote liberally from the Dali's explanation because it was truly the most interesting part of the show.

"We have presented, where possible, magnificent original paintings to provide compelling images and reveal key notions about the nature of dreams and their meaning to us...  Where original works were not available for loan, we have included high resolution reproductions, and labeled them as such, to ensure visitors can experience images essential to this story of dreams.  

"Daydreams" by Philip Guston (1970) (Oil on linen)

The loan of artworks between museums -- a traditional necessity to share the cultural wealth of humanity -- has become exceedingly difficult due to leaping costs for transportation and insurance. As well, an intense introspection among arts institutions as to their identity and purpose has heightened the difficulty...  [Insert information here about all the lending the Dali has done]

Our hope is that the museum industry will emerge from this hardship with a renewed confidence in its ability, and in equal measure its responsibility, to share its works -- as painting is a powerful tool for generating understanding of self and others." 

This hybrid approach to the exhibit and the explanation for the format are what Maggie and I found ourselves talking about on the way home. First, while it was obvious which of the works were prints because they were literally on the wall with no frames, it's a bit disingenuous for the Museum to say that they have "labeled" the prints as such. Did you notice that the medium is included in some of the titles of the works in this blog but not in others? If the medium was specified, the work was an original; if not, it was a print. I'm not sure that qualifies as being "labeled as such." 

This potential confusion is enhanced by the fact that the institutions that own the original works were specified on the wall card. That choice/requirement left this viewer scratching her head -- and wondering about the arrangements between the museums relating to the Dali's "borrowing" of the work. I knew I should have pursued art law. 

"The Dream" by Max Beckmann
(1921) Oil on canvas

But then there's a larger question. Is it important to see an original work in order to come away with an appreciation of the exhibit's theme? Obviously you miss seeing the brushstrokes and certain nuances, but are those "details" important when it's the subject matter that's relevant?  Maggie and I were on the fence on this question, but we also came away wondering how critical it was to include the works in the exhibit that were not available for loan. Weren't there other paintings that could be borrowed that would illuminate the theme just as well? Again, I wasn't the curator. But I will say that based on my (limited) appreciation of what the Dali was going for, it seems that many other works would have been suitable for the purpose. At the end of the day, I came away interested in the approach but feeling that the Dali didn't want to spend the money to borrow original paintings. 

And let's go back for a moment to the Dali's nod to the "introspection" that's taking place at museums with respect to their collections. Yes, institutions are taking a fresh look at their collections with a view to what's happening in our world. I'm all in favor of that. But what does that have to do with the lending of works for this show, particularly when the ownership of the paintings replicated in this exhibit was specified?  If a particular painting was found problematic for some reason, the museum that owns it would still take the brunt of the pushback. A fuller explanation of the connection between these issues in the context of this exhibit would have been both interesting and enlightening. In its absence, this commentary seemed out of place -- and perhaps a way to obfuscate the Museum's decision-making process. But that's just my takeaway. 

I'd be remiss if I didn't note that the exhibit also includes an AR portion in which you give the machine a description of a recent dream and it creates a related image. Kind of fun. 

"The Shape of Dreams" continues at the Dali Museum through April 30th. Let me know what you think if you go.