Around Carnegie Mellon University there are two major art venues: the Miller Gallery, and the Carnegie Art Museum. In the five minute walking distance from each other the area is infested with college students. This years’ Pittsburgh Biennial decided to venture out to these two locations with works of pittsburgh based artists. Although they share the title of the Pittsburgh Biennial, they have different personalities pushing them apart from one another.
The Carnegie Museum of Art was founded in 1895 by Andrew Carnegie. He envisioned a museum collection featuring the “Old Masters of Tomorrow”, starting the first modern art museum. While the carnegie art museum has a rich history, the four story Miller Gallery was founded by the Carnegie Mellon University Alumna, Regina Gouger Miller, in 2000. She envisioned a gallery that exhibits art revolving around social issues. The two different venues had a Pittsburgh Biennial fall 2011 with very different personalities.
The artists in the Carnegie Museum of Art are mostly pieces of successful individual artists, some who have been exhibited globally. The medium was mostly video, paintings, photos, and sculpture. Initially, the mediums were all traditional making it seem like a typical elegant modern art exhibition. While the color scheme of the Carnegie Museum of Art had a monochromatic tone to it, the Miller Gallery popped with color. The Miller Gallery mostly exhibited a group of artist working collaboratively. They focused on many different mediums, with many installations using everyday objects like bricks, crayons, plastic bags, and books. The gallery seemed to be focused toward the community, encouraging interaction with the art pieces.
The interaction at the Miller Gallery was in very different forms. TRANFORMASIUM which is a made up of Ruthie Stringer, Dana Bishop-Root, Leslie Stem, and Caledonia Curry, was taken place on the right side of the second floor. It was an installation of the deconstruction of an abandoned building cleaning the bricks to make them reusable. This exhibition had many interactive activities, including mazes, word puzzles, and coloring activities, all done by brightly colored washable makers, or crayons.
On the third floor, the installation of subRosa, which is made up of Hyla Willis, and Faith Wilding, was evenly divided to the left and right wings of the room. SubRosa focused on the affect of feminism to the scientific world. They also had interactive aspects, ranging from writing a letter to a feminist scientist, to siting at the installations of tables and chairs each focusing on a scientific topic.
While the Miller Gallery was filled with interactive activities, the Carnegie Museum of Art had unnoticeable white benches to sit and contemplate about the art work. Other then the rock hard benches, the Carnegie Museum of art only had one piece that was interactive. Brandon Boan had an organic sculpture that was encouraged by the viewer to see through the 3D glasses provided. Like many formal museums interaction with the art is limited.
Like the interaction, the information the viewer is given at the Carnegie Museum of Art is very limited, if there is any given at all. There is normally a short paragraph explaining the artist, and a vague idea of the full body of work. Other then this the museum is filled with little tablets with the name of the artist, the name of the art piece, the medium and the year it was created. This allows the viewer to make up their own interpretations as they encounter the art work. On the other hand the Miller Gallery was very informative. Self-Reliance Library, which was taken place in the first floor, was a collection of older published works by Temporary Services which is made up of Brett Bloom, Salem Collo-Julin, and Marc Fischer. In their pamphlet, they explained their purpose, concept, and also their collection. They explained 49 different books that were in a part of their collection. On the third floor the well designed “Global Cities Model Worlds” took place in the middle of the room, being sandwiched by the exhibition subRosa. Like its title, it is focusing on the different cities around the globe, and presents the thought of the global city. This installation was made up of around 20-25 industrialized triangular tables with information of the global cities on each table. Most of the exhibitions educated the viewer through written word, activities, or videos. These differences showed the different personalities of the two venues. The Carnegie Museum of Art seemed more elegant and formal, while the Miller Gallery was educational, inviting and nonthreatening.
1.Carnegie Museum of Art. Web. 8 Oct. 2011. <http://web.cmoa.org/>.
2.Miller Gallery at Carnegie Mellon University. Web. 8 Oct. 2011. <http://millergallery.cfa.cmu.edu/>.
3.Suparak, Astria, comp.Miller 10 Years, Gallery at Carnegie Mellon University: 2011-2012 Season Preview. Print.
4.Miller Gallery, comp.2011 Pittsburgh Biennial 9.16-12.11.11. Print.
5.Miller Gallery, comp.Global Cities Model Worlds. Print.
6.Miller Gallery, comp.Feminist Matter(s): Propositions & Undoings. Print.
7.Miller Gallery, comp.Thoughts On Peace in an Air Raid. Print.
8.Miller Gallery, comp.JustSeeds: Artists’ Cooperative. Print.
9.Miller Gallery, comp.Make Your Own Gold: Bricks ACTIVITIES. Print.
10.Miller Gallery, comp.Self-Reliance Library. Print.
artcritpgh 