New York City is famous for many things. Broadway, Central Park, The Statue of Liberty, the Empire State Building, Macy's...the list goes on. One thing it boasts is a plethora of excellent museums. I was on holiday in NYC recently and, being a bit of a history nerd, was excited to check out a few of its world-famous museums. Luckily my travel buddy Rowena was on exactly the same page.
I'd been to the Metropolitan Museum of Art (the 'Met' if you want to be casual) once before, ten years ago, and only for about an hour before it closed so I was looking forward to spending a whole afternoon there. Because we took our museum trip seriously - as one should - Rowena and I decided to go our separate ways and spend our time at the Met exploring solo. Armed with a map, a backpack and an intrepid spirit of cultural exploration, I knew at once where I wanted to head first - the Impressionists.
The Met is huge. Massive. If you have ever tried navigating to a particular era in the National Gallery, but actually ended up finding yourself in a room of fat cherub paintings when you really wanted Picasso, then think of that. But on steroids. There was a map. I followed the map. It didn't help much. That being said, there is something freeing about getting lost and discovering new and intriguing art that you might not have bothered about otherwise.
One of the first exhibitions I came across on my way to my chosen destination was one based on the theme of this year's Met Gala. Every year the Met hosts a famous ball which is presided over by the icon and titan that is Anna Wintour and attended by the most famous celebrities dressed in bizarre outfits. There is always a slightly pretentious theme and, for designers and celebrities alike, it is a chance to stretch the imagination and come up with something really creative and outlandish. This year's theme was entitled 'Heavenly Bodies: Fashion and the Catholic Imagination.' Quite. On display were outfits that have been inspired or influenced by Catholicism in some way. Clothes from fashion houses such as Dolce and Gabbana, Versace and Alexander McQueen, to name a few, were featured and ranged from the beautiful to the odd. Accompanying the designs were items from the Vatican. The exhibition was held in the cloisters, aptly making it feel like we were in a Catholic church. To add to the overall effect, it opened out into a large room dressed a bit like a cathedral with 16th century choral music playing over loudspeakers. It was overkill but also somehow that made it even more excellent.
After visiting a number of other art eras I hadn't intended on seeing, but ended up mostly enjoying anyway, I finally made it to the Manets and the Degas. It may be a bit cliche but the Impressionists are some of my favourite artists. The Met hosts an impressive array, with some of the more well-known Monets on display, such as the Water Lilly Pond, and a whole room of Degas ballerinas. The Met also is home to many other non-Impressionist paintings like Van Gogh's self portrait and The Denial of Saint Peter by Caravaggio. To tell you all the paintings I saw would take all day. And frankly, I don't remember them all. But I did end up discovering some artists that I'd never seen before and really liked, like Pierre Auguste Cot.
The Met doesn't just include paintings but also sculptures, furniture, costumes, Egyptian mummies and even a temple. I didn't make it around everything I wanted to see - museums are surprisingly tiring - but I felt like I got to see the majority of its delights. I now consider the Met one of my favourite museums ever and one of my highlights of NYC.
