Vienna

It’s tough to see everything you should or mean to see, even on a relatively leisurely trip.  Even more frustrating is trying to remember more than a fraction of what you do get to see.  I can recommend everything I’ve seen in this post, so I don’t know how useful it will be for prioritization.

Even if it were completely empty, the Belvedere would be well worth a visit because, as the guides are happy to repeatedly point it, it is one of the best examples of Baroque architecture in the world.  Really, it is two examples, since there is a Lower and an Upper Belvedere, the later built when the Lower was judged insufficiently extravagant. By it’s owner, Prince Eugene.  (quick parenthetical- it’s kind of funny that in France you an find statues of Napoleon, and nearly everywhere else in Europe, of people who fought him).

I had a good look at the Impressionist and Romantic , and at the Symbolists and Decadence exhibition.  They also have Klimt’s “The Kiss” here, and if I recall correctly, I think I’ve seen it twice because it was at the Neue Galerie in NY a while ago.  I don’t think I understand the reasoning behind the symbolists, and am generally not sympathetic to mysticism, but there are certainly some very striking images.  Unfortunately, I only got the briefest look at the inter-war period. As for Gironcoli, I only saw what was inside, not the garden, but when it comes to this (and some contemporaries no less an authority than MOMA assure are among them most important artists, like Beuys) I'm a philistine.  It’s not clear what the social or political points are, or how this responds/ to or refutes an artistic tradition.  Nor do I see the aesthetic appeal or innovation.  Maybe it will click at some point.  Regardless, Belvedere is not to be missed.

The Leopold museum was the only one I think I saw most of, which was exhausting but worth it.  Someone told me once Klimt is excessively feminine, based mostly on the supposed popularity of the Kiss posters with college women.  Even if you buy this (I don’t) seeing a broader selection of work would likely change your mind.  Death and Life has a particular impact.  Egon Schiele is well represented.  The fauves might be considered more evolutionary than revolutionary with the benefit of hindsight; but one can only imagine how provocative Schiele must have been.  He’s still pretty provocative today.  It’s not surprising to see a Freud quote on the wall next to one of his works.

The Murmoc is abruptly modern compared to its surroundings.  The portion of the permanent collection seen had some really nice things from the first half of the 20^th C, including more Schieler.  They (audio guide again) say this piece can be seen as a metaphor for life:

 

There’s a death’s-head if you look closely.

 The main exhibition is Albert Oelen.  His work is more interesting with guide.  I appreciate his using painting and 2 dimensional works when much of the contemporary avante guard insisted the form was inherently “reactionary” and “dead”.  Yet I can’t help wondering how it will stack up over time against some of the greatest works from centuries ago.  I wonder if some of his work is representative of much of the art world becoming too self-referential, relating primarily to previous artists and artistic movement, to the detriment of the artist and the world as a subject.  Though much of his work was about “de-contextualizing”, he allows for some influences:

At the War Museum, the WWI section is closed.  The most arresting exhibit was the car Franz Ferdinand was in when assassinated.  He was killed when his visit to victims of a previous, failed attempt shortly before provided a target of opportunity to another enemy.  The museum also includes the bloodstain uniform he wore and the chaise long on which he died, greatly bringing to life the precipitating event of the First World War.  There is also a comprehensive display of interwar and WWI related exhibits, including the famous 8.8cm German gun, and all sorts of Third Reich and “Anschluss” related material. 

I'd hoped I might find a little more the trip about how Austrians see themselves.  Do they consider themselves primarily German, but through the twists of history it did not work out?  Or rather do they consider their independence a close run thing to be proudly preserved?  There is some evidence for both views.  Today, all the guides insist the German annexation was the darkest day in Austrian history.   This seems somewhat disingenuous.  Ethnic nationalism was one of the main forces that undermined the Hapsburg empire, and there was at the least a substantial portion of the population which enthusiastically welcomed the union with Germany.  On the other hand, language notwithstanding, the Hapsburgs had fought the Prussians, whose empire Germany could broadly be considered between 1871 and 1945. 

In any case, the museum also includes a surprisingly expansive navel section, and a tank garden.

I took a guided buss tour took me to Schonbrunn, the “mini” Versailles of the Hapsburgs.  It is an incredibly beautiful palace, as a quick Google search will affirm.  It is free to access the grounds outside, and it was nice to see people using such a beautiful venue as a park (as with Belvedere).  It was incredibly crowded, reminding that tourism is now the number one industry of the city.  If the reader goes, I recommend a guide.  You’ll get bits you’d otherwise likely miss.  For example, an impressive painting of a Royal wedding is even more so than it first appears, because each portrait is of an actual attendee whose portrait was separately made by the artist and then transferred to the larger work , which must have taken years.  All the attendees are accurately recorded with one notable exception- the Queen had a young Mozart painted in even though his first visit to was two years after the wedding.  The tour also shows the “Napoleon” room, which is the room used when he twice occupied Vienna, and the room in which  his son died a few years after his ultimate defeat.

            Vienna is known as much for music as visual art.  A Mozart Concert at the “Golden Hall” in the Musikverein seemed like it would be enjoyable and exceeded expectations.  The singers, hamming it up quite a bit, seemed to enjoy putting on the show and the packed hall, itself beautiful, also did.

The cheapest ticket had me on the floor looking up rather than down as most of the rest of the audience, but the view was still fine, the sound exactly the same.

Vienna orderly, quiet,  about 15% smaller than about 100 years ago on eve of WWI.

Vienna Art Museum (Kunsthistorisches  Mudeum) – I spent a couple of hours here, which is a mistake.  Though not a sprawling monster of a museum like, for example, the Met in NY, about twice that time is called for, and possibly more if you are up for it.    An interesting factoid is that this museum and the nearby science museum, where commissioned by the Hapsburgs and designed for purpose.  This is unusual in Europe, where converted palaces are more common.  The Dutch Golden period art should be seen:

  

In the face of paintings like these, when people claim that painting is dead, or that craft is irrelevant, the perhaps apocryphal story of the late  19^th century patent officer comes to mind.  He claimed that he and his office would soon be irrelevant, since all possible inventions would soon be patented.   Sometimes it feels like contemporary artists have forgotten how to paint, or maybe can’t be bothered; this sort of thing took time and care, which might explain there being only a few dozen odd known Vermeers.

There are also amazing objects, like this salt and pepper Cellar:           

Or this hand carved stone bowl, apparently as few as 2 mm thick in spots:

Not that a week in mostly in the center spent often in or looking for a museum can give any sort of realistic view, but Vienna as a whole give an impression of placid prosperity, which belies it’s turbulent history.  It is interesting to note that it is about 15% smaller now than it was a century ago on the eve of the Great War, perhaps reflecting its transformation from a bustling cosmopolitan capital of a major empire to a mid size capital of a small, wealthy, homogeneous country.  One of my subjective impressions was of literal quietness; the extent to which you can hear your own footsteps or a spoken conversation a half block away.