The National Gallery

1. Critique the logo

Unfortunately, I do think that the logo is just a typeface. I don't know what font this is, but it is just "The National Gallery," in a certain font. It's boring and it doesn't say anything about what it showcases inside its walls. Additionally, the banners are all plain red and simply state, "Admission Free." Once again, this leaves you completely oblivious to what the National Gallery actually displays.  

After viewing the collection, I would propose a symbol of some sort. Like you had mentioned, I would also decrease the size of "Gallery," because there's no point in having it be larger than the rest of the typeface. I don't know what symbol would be fitting, but something to distinguish it. Or maybe a frame or something considering they have great, bold, and ornate frames on almost all of their paintings.

Although my new design is still plain, it's just a twist on the logo they already have. They like a dark red and now their logo is encased in a dark red frame!

2. van Gogh

To be completely honest, I was surprised at how ugly van Gogh's Sunflower painting is in person. Honestly, children could imitate this painting and it would look quite similar. I am not art smart at all, but I enjoy aesthetically pleasing art or unconventional funky art; van Gogh doesn't quite fit in either. However, upon closer examination, I think what makes the Sunflower painting and van Gogh, in general, so famous is the technique he uses in creating the colors. Pictures do not capture his layering technique, which he uses liberally. In the sunflower painting specifically, he uses layers upon layers of paint to create an almost 3-D effect of colors and layers. The same technique can be seen in his painting Wheatfield with Cypresses where he specifically uses this layering technique in the grass to highlight the different colors of the grass. The sunflower painting and the wheatfield painting are so colorful that you want to touch it just to see how it would feel. His technique is unique and self-inspired which I think makes his place in art history justified. Even though his work is not aesthetically pleasing or pretty, he is so talented and different from other artists and any work of his probably stands out as uniquely his.

3. Object of Desire

I knew when I saw The Water-Lily Pond (1899) by Claude Monet that it was my object of desire and entirely suitable for my future home.

The future home where it would be displayed is my large cottage in the woods. It looks something like this picture.

  

It would be displayed above the fireplace like this picture below.

The Water-Lily painting would suit my future home because it is a painting set in nature and my home would also be set in nature. The painting is flush with green and other natural colors found in nature like pretty pink flowers. I would think that I could walk outside and see nature in its most natural setting just as it is painted by Monet. In fact, I love the painting so much that I would decorate my cottage around this painting. Monet's painting celebrates nature and the bridge celebrates the small human touches that can make nature more accessible and approachable without ruining the beauty.

4. Gallery / Display

The National Gallery does indeed have the brightest palette of wall colors from all of our previous museum visits. I noticed walls that were red, gray, teal, purple, and various print patterns. I felt that the colors of the wall enhanced the displays because they didn't detract or distract from the paintings at all. The paintings were hung in salon style, so you weren't overwhelmed with the number of paintings per wall and the frames on all of the paintings helped to distinguish the paintings from the colorful wallpaper.

(picture credit:http://www.nationalgalleries.org/media/5/titian_2.jpg)

 In fact, I really liked all of the color choices that the National Gallery chose to display their paintings. I feel that the consistency in one color for a section of rooms was nice because it created a sense of cohesiveness and then the change in color for a new section was also nice because it kept you from becoming bored. I think that having a neutral color of white for the walls of the Tate Modern makes perfect sense due to the lack of frames and the importance of bold colors in the paintings. However, the colors in these paintings were usually paired with an assortment of colors as most of the paintings were of people or landscapes. The focus was often on a figure or an object, therefore the necessity of having a white wall as a neutral place for the eyes to rest and not be distracted was unnecessary. 

5. Exploitation / Merchandising?

The first display that I saw upon entering the gift shop was van Gogh's Sunflower painting in various forms such as an address book, an umbrella, a scarf, candles, stationary set, silk ties, and finger puppets. It was the grossest display of mass merchandising I've ever seen! I didn't even love the Sunflowers painting and I was disgusted by the way that it was used and reformatted for these various items. I think that the use of Sunflowers to create merchandising like this diminishes how great the painting is and it's significance in art history. At least postcards and posters keep it in painting form and they're for admiration, a way for non-rich people to own a piece of van Gogh in their own homes. Postcards and posters don't diminish from the original work of art itself because you know that it is merely a reproduction of a picture of the painting and they are still in a similar format. How can you admire Sunflowers in the form of an umbrella? Or a finger puppet? It's just a sunflower finger puppet!

I think that the mass merchandising of various works of art apart of pictures, post cards and posters is a perversion to the original piece of art itself. It's tacky and it doesn't say much about appreciating art.

6. Object of appreciation

My original object of appreciation was Flowers in a Terracotta Vase (1736-1737) by Jan van Huysum. I liked it because of how realistic it looked. The grapes looked so real that I almost felt like if I reached out to touch them I would really be able to touch them! The flowers were so detailed and simply gorgeous. I couldn't believe how much attention van Huysum paid to each petal of each flower. However, upon seeing it on a postcard, it looked so flat and un-special. I still liked it, but I couldn't say that I appreciated it as much as I did upon the first glance.

I went back to the Impressionism section and I found the one painting that had drawn me back for a second glance within one visit. 

Name: The Skiff (La Yole) 

Year: 1875

Artist: Renoir

Oil on canvas

I would return to this painting for greater contemplation due to the technique that Renoir used in painting. The various shades of blue used in the pond and the lovely orange of the canoe simply amaze me. In addition, his technique creates such a blurred effect that still manages to convey the scene quite clearly. It almost seems as if the rower of the boat is watching Renoir as he paints them. The object is watching as the painter paints her...how neat is that? It's not the direct gaze of someone who is being painted for a portrait but rather the curiously blank face of someone turned toward the front of the painting. It's like a picture that's too blurry. The more you look, the more you can try to make out details but in the end, you can only guess at what you see.