Can Hong Kong museum-goers put away the phones and see the art?

Richard Serra once said in an interview with Charlie Rose, “Art is purposely useless”. What the artist known for his colossal sculptures meant was that, unlike architecture, art can escape from all constraints and restrictions and be free. Well, Serra would eat his words if he had a chance to see what museum visitors are like these days. At the recent “Picasso for Asia – A Conversation ” exhibition at M+, most people were either busy taking photos of the art or taking selfies with the art behind them. I wondered how many people would put away their mobile phones to enjoy the show, or have the heart to learn a little more background on the works. More often than not, I found myself getting in the way of the selfie-takers when reading the labels for the artworks. All of a sudden, art has a lot of purpose. It now serves as the ideal backdrop for social media vanity as the selfie-takers scream: “I was there!” “I saw a real Picasso!” But I am guilty as charged; I had a family photo taken in front of Leonardo da Vinci’s The Last Supper several weeks ago. Having read about the painting for years, including in Dan Brown’s Da Vinci’s Code, I was mesmerised when I saw the masterpiece in person. I could not resist sharing the joy with others back home as I stepped out of the dining room of Santa Maria delle Grazie. Throughout the years, I have been to museums and galleries in London, Amsterdam and Milan. Occasionally, there were a few selfies-takers, but I rarely got in anyone’s way. Not everybody was snap-happy. I don’t know if it’s a Hong Kong or an Asian convention to digitally capture everything one sees but it seems mind-boggling to be taking so many photos. After all, many of the works of art shown in museums can be found online. The government and the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority, among others, have tried hard to foster appreciation for art in the city. Despite their best efforts, I am ashamed to say that selfies seem to be how we enjoy art in Hong Kong. Can we elevate and educate ourselves to appreciate what we see beyond a superficial level? Up until the 19th century in Western visual culture, art was about skill and craftsmanship, hand-eye coordination and masterfully bringing realistic and lively scenes – real or imaginary – to the viewer’s eyes. Critiques often centred on technique, light and shadow, flatness and curves, human anatomy and movements, passion and energy, and so on. From the late 19th century, art progressively evolved as a medium for personal, cultural and political expression, as opposed to a mere interpretation of various subject matters. Art became a medium for artists to express how they see the world. There are at least two levels of art appreciation. First, we can enjoy art purely for its aesthetic value or our emotional response to it; second, we can learn about the intrinsic story of a work of art. There are so many artists with so many world views. Whether it’s Mark Rothko’s colour fields, Jackson Pollock’s splatters or Marcel Duchamp’s porcelain urinal, if we only took works of art at face value, they wouldn’t mean much. Appreciation for modern art has to be learned. A superbly curated exhibition can offer us precious opportunities to explore the mind of an artist and empathise with another human being’s world view. Nowadays, the art world is reaching new heights commercially and becoming a mature market. Buyers see art as investment vehicles, despite not always understanding the essence of what they are investing in. While some still appreciate the technique or the story, others seek shock value and attention, perhaps with the help of a banana duct-taped to a wall. Art is in the eye of the beholder. Our opinions are part of the dialogue that engages artists, their admirers and their critics. However, that does not change the fact that appreciation of modern art is learned and cultivated. If one is not educated about modern art and its many movements, such as cubism, one will not fully comprehend the meanings of Picasso’s cubist works. I’ll be the first to admit that I did not understand cubism and wanted to know more, as a designer of space, about how Picasso was using two-dimensional canvases to depict three-dimensional subject matters by deconstructing and fragmenting what we normally encounter in the real world. I do not claim to know everything but I am certainly aware of my ignorance, which is why at M+, it took me time to take in the work, read the labels, step back, look again and reflect. The Picasso exhibit offers this opportunity to the public. Perhaps Picasso would have wanted us to offer alternative interpretations. Museums are meant for learning, inspiring and sharing ideas. Now that we have a world-class museum, especially one that is making a tremendous effort to collaborate with its counterparts to bring masterpieces to Hong Kong, it is time to put away the phones and smell the roses. To quote Picasso, “art has neither past nor future. All I have ever made was for the present.” Being present is a very mindful act of living in the moment. When we are standing in front of the art, let’s navigate our thoughts and feelings and try to see the world through someone else’s eyes.

Can Hong Kong museum-goers put away the phones and see the art?

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}At the Picasso show, I got in the way of selfie-takers when reading artwork labels. We in Hong Kong have to elevate how we appreciate art

At the Picasso show, I got in the way of selfie-takers when reading artwork labels. We in Hong Kong have to elevate how we appreciate art