One man tried to condense the history of modern art into one appealing chart that could fit on a gallery catalog cover. All things considered, I think he did a fine job representing a vast, detailed history with a timeline, some arrows and some words.
However, the fact that this was shown at a modern art museum and used as a supplement to their exhibition makes the simplicity of this chart almost insulting. A chain of events did indeed occur through the development of western art, but inspiration is not something that can be mapped with just a few arrows. As Tufte points out, the creator of this chart didn’t even include arrows which suggest the way artists who created in the same time period affected each others’ works. How could one not be inspired by one’s peers? Tufte is also accurate in his assessment of the sameness of the arrows. To suggest that these influences all occurred in the same way is also oversimplifying a complex process.
It’s not that I think this is a bad graphic—not at all. For someone who is not trained in the arts or art history, this could be extremely helpful in understanding abstract art. However, this was made for display in a modern art museum, which attracts an audience that would already understand most of what’s displayed here. It therefore comes off as oversimplified and even insulting.
No comments:
Post a Comment