Rendez-vous with Art

by Philippe de Montebello, Martin Gayford

The fruits of a lifetime of experience by a cultural colossus, Philippe de Montebello, the longest-serving director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in its history, distilled in conversations with an acclaimed critic

Beginning with a fragment of yellow jasper―all that is left of the face of an Egyptian woman who lived 3,500 years ago―this book confronts the elusive questions: how, and why, do we look at art?

Philippe de Montebello and Martin Gayford talked in art galleries or churches or their own homes, and this book is structured around their journeys. But whether they were in the Louvre or the Prado, the Mauritshuis of the Palazzo Pitti, they reveal the pleasures of truly looking.

De Montebello shares the sense of excitement recorded by Goethe in his autobiography―"akin to the emotion experienced on entering a House of God"―but also reflects on why these secular temples might nevertheless be the "worst possible places to look at art." But in the end both men convey, with subtlety and brilliance, the delights and significance of their subject matter and some of the intense creations of human beings throughout our long history.

Genres: Art, Nonfiction, Art History, History, Travel

248 pages, Hardcover

First published September 8, 2014

Reviews

[Tony · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is less about Art than it is about the museums where art is displayed. So, it asks the questions:

-- What factors go into accepting a price for a work of art?

-- "Does simply being in a city where the art was made make a difference?"

-- What is different about a painting, done centuries ago in natural light, and now on display in a museum's brightness?

-- Should art be kept in its place of origin (a colossal statue of a lion unearthed in northern Iraq, say) or shipped around the world to be displayed like a real lion in a zoo?

-- Is the 'bunching together of Oceanic, sub-Saharan African, Mesoamerican and Native North American' art, 'disparate material from unrelated cultures', under the term primitive, unintelligent as well as insensitive?

-- Will museums, like newspapers, give way to internet searches?

The idea of this book is that we, the readers, are eavesdropping on two men having a continuing dialogue through various museums around the world. The men are Martin Gayford (art critic and author) and Philippe de Montebello (the longest-serving director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art). They walk us through the Met, the Museo dell'Operadi Santa Croce, the Louvre, the Prado, and others. We hear their instant thoughts: 'simply ravishing', 'satisfying and scrumptious'. And they elaborate. Gayford, upon gazing at Dürer's Eve . . .



. . . offers, "She looks very German. You can imagine her serving beers."

They pass by more famous works, surrounded by crowds, and find quieter gems. Still, they stop at View of Delft where De Montebello says, "you feel guilty if you linger as you wish to and as you must, guilty that you are in the way of someone else wanting to look at it . . . it's just too well known, too sought after: who has the time to swoon, let alone die?"

Early in my reading of this book, I thought it a little light, but then I realized that the problem was in my expectations. This is not a study of Art but, rather, a monograph on the nature of art display. And though not necessarily a criticism, I also couldn't help but notice that the most recent piece of art discussed was a Goya from 1814. Also, anyone who could say, as Gayford did, that "American cities are constructed on a rational street grid" has never driven in Pittsburgh.

[Ярослава]

Карантин - це найдовший у цілому моєму житті період без музеїв. Я часто і дуже змалечку ходжу в музеї, відколи у дворічному віці скандалізувала працівниць у Київській картинній галереї)))
- Що тобі найбільше сподобалося? - спитали працівниці, розчулені маленькою кругленькою мною.
- Сіські, - рішуче сказала я (родинна легенда стверджує, що взагалі-то хотіла сказати "Шишкін", але не вимовляла багато приголосних). 
Так от, відтоді я часто ходжу в музеї! Я люблю музеї! Вони мені заміняють майндфулнес і медитацію! Моя остання вилазка перед карантином була саме на виставку! А тепер протягом карантину мені гостро бракує музеїв в організмі, і тому сіла читати книжку розмов Філіппа де Монтебелло (директора Метрополітен-музею протягом 30+ років) і арт-критика Мартіна Ґейфорда. Коли Монтебелло і Ґейфорд опинялися в одному місті, то йшли разом дивитися на мистецтво й говорили про те, як ми взагалі взаємодіємо з мистецтвом - передовсім у музейному форматі. Це не критика, не мистецтвознавство, а саме спроба зафіксувати досвід спільного споглядання мистецтва з цікавими співрозмовниками. Тобто те, чого мені так бракує в карантині.

Наскрізні тези, які зринають майже в кожній розмові:
* Більшість артефактів, які ми бачимо в музеях, є фрагментами, навіть якщо видаються цілісними (скажімо, нібито завершена картина на біблійні теми може виявитися фрагментом вівтаря, але ми вже не відчитуємо цього цілісного синтаксису). Музеї - це мистецтво, вирване з контексту, а колись воно було site-specific і вмонтованим у більший комплекс (переважно церкви). І тільки з ХІХ століття мистецтво починають створювати саме з прицілом на музейний формат взаємодії ("Пліт Медузи" Жеріко - один з найраніших прикладів).
* Перехід до музею передбачає зміну функцію предмета (скажімо, з релігійної на естетичну); опинившись у музеї, предмет втрачає не тільки контекст - "свою матір архітектуру" - а і свою початкову функцію. Утім, зараз предмети навіть на місці втрачають цю функцію - скажімо, заходячи в церкву у Венеції, ти візьмеш радше брошурку з описом творів мистецтва, ніж молитовник. (З іншого боку, у секулярному суспільстві саме музей знайомить з Біблією, бо там до картини буде примітка з переказом сюжету, в церкві - ні).
* Перепрошую, тут мені не вистачає засобів не обсценної лексики, бо дратує до іскор з очей: пропиздівши пів книжки про те, як важливо сприймати твори мистецтва в їхньому питомому контексті, географічному й архітектурному, співрозмовники переходять до етично найдискусійнішої частини книжки - розмови про повернення арт-об'єктів, які колонізатори з липкими ручками напиздили в завойованих народів. Монтебелло різко проти репатріації арт-об'єктів, бо, мовляв, поневіряння предметів мистецтва - це теж частина їхньої історії, тож де опинилися, там і пригодилися. Загалом, із серйозними щами стає на бік крадіїв і весь такий моралізаторськи: "My view is that we shouldn’t rewrite history, and that after an extended period of time the work’s life in another context becomes a legitimate and often meaningful layer of its history." Приправляє всіма колоніальними стереотипами - і ващє, мовляв, ми їх читати навчили, тобто аналізувати об'єкти, які вкрали: "In our day, when we relish wallowing in retrospective guilt, we need to remember that there was a repayment in scholarship and knowledge. Even the countries of origin were ignorant of, or at least indifferent to, what is today claimed so fervently as prized patrimony and – according to the restitution claims – national ‘property’." Ґейфорд намагається його підловити: але ж ви самі говорили про важливість сприймати об'єкти в комплексі. Скажімо, ті ж храмові скульптури з Камбоджі в мінімалістичному сеттінгу музею перетворюються на, умовно кажучи, Джакометті. А Монтебелло такий: хай дякують, смерди, а то без нас і не знали б, що таке твір мистецтва: "If Hindu gods are no longer important to Cambodians, why should they preserve them except as ‘national patrimony’ and ‘works of art’ – both ideas introduced from the West?" Я б теж рада вдаватися у всю цю казуїстику й виправдовувати крадіїв, але я належу до культури, в якої крали, а не яка крала, тому очі наливаються кров'ю і хочеться запропонувати цьому чоловікові доброму сходити нафіг прямо дуже швидко-швидко.
(Про украдене в нас - ну, скажімо, зі свіженького - стаття Тимура Бобровського, який знайшов скарби з Києво-Печерської Лаври в каталогах москвоських музеїв; чи ширша стаття Катерини Липи, яка згадує цей лаврський сюжет, але й багато іншого - від того, що крадуть зараз у кримських музеях, до фресок із Михайлівського).
* На цій цитаті ледь не просльозилася: "Девід Гокні зауважив, що річ може заціліти згрубша з двох причин: вона або створена з міцного матеріалу, який опирається впливу часу, або її хтось дуже любить". Ну бо я регулярно плачу через те, скільки в Києві щодня втрачається архітектурної спадщини, мені ці будиночки старенькі в принципі завжди жаль, а якщо це формулювати в термінах нелюбові, то взагалі.
* Книжка містить лайфгаки, як підступитися до конкретних об'єктів: скажімо, Монтебелло каже, що свого часу поділяв зрозумілий до багатьох із нас острах перед грецькими чорно-червоними вазами: музеї виставляють їх забагато, тож вони починають видаватися взаємозамінними. Фішка в тому, щоб розглядати кожен глек окремо як графіку на папері. Але якісь речі програють від того, що їх вішають в музеї серіями, запрошуючи до порівняння: у чиїйсь приватній оселі, як одиничний екземпляр, вони справляли б більший вплив (у нього інший приклад у тому самому жанрі, але мені в цій категорії згадується Каналетто. Каналетто штампував венеційські пейзажі: жив би нині - клепав би листівки-фото. Один Каналетто - майже сюрреалістичний: у його картинах є перспектива, але немає глибини, деталі не згладжуються з відстанню, черепиці й віконниці на задньому тлі виписано так само ретельно, як на передньому, є в цьому щось тривожне, якщо довго розглядати одного Каналетто. На жаль, він був плодючий, як кролик, тому в кожному відомому музеї Каналлето висить штук шість-шістнадцять, і при такому нагромадженні ти їх уже не розглядаєш, вони стають невидимими).
* Монтебелло espouses досить елітаристський підхід: при відвідинах музею треба тяжко працювати - уважно розглядати, вникати, освічуватися. Мистецтво - справа серйозна: "Isn’t that what we all seek in museums? To be raised up, to have our world enhanced by the contemplation of surpassing works of art? To those who would seek a low common denominator in what their museums do in order to ‘relate’ to their public, I would simply say that confronting greatness does not diminish us, on the contrary." Тобто, в цілому, я згодна, що мистецтво потребує підготовки, але ж не можна прямо з порога відлякувати від музеїв нових користувачів, які ще тільки починають свій шлях?
* Є інсайдерські музейні жарти штибу "Щоразу, як заповнюєш прогалину в колекції, створюєш дві нові: праворуч від артефакта й ліворуч", цікаво описано логіку музейних закупівель. Скажімо, всякі об'єкти проміжного статусу можуть опинитися поза музеєм, бо неясно, в яку колекцію вони потрапляють (особливо актуально для неєвропейських культур).
* Просто прикольні картини, які доти не знала, побачила тільки в цій книжці: "The Glorification of the Virgin" Geertgen tot Sint Jans (15 ст.): лінк на великий скан з вікіпедії (Діва Марія верхи на серпику місяця, навколо якого обвивається дракончик, awwww); "Portrait of Elisabeth Bellinghausen" Bartholomäus Bruyn (16 ст.) лінк (як Бронзіно, тільки не він :) теоретично, це навіть мусила б бачити - але наживо не пам'ятаю).
* Монтебелло і Ґейфорд говорять про проблему взаємодії з відомими об'єктами мистецтва: з одного боку, вони сексі й заманюють глядачів у музеї, з іншого боку, вони такі знайомі, що глядачі вже на них знечулені. Скажімо, у "Пошуках втраченого часу" Берґотт помирає перед картиною Вермеєра, переповнений емоціями. Для нас Вермеєр такий знайомий, "що немає часу навіть захоплюватися, не те, що помирати". (І при цьому культ "відвідати супер-відому картину" змушує нас пробігати підтюпцем повз не менш цікаві, але менш відомі роботи). (Тру сторі про взаємодію з дуже відомими об'єктами мистецтва: на початку цієї книжки Монтебелло й Ґейфорд заходять у Санта Марія дель Карміне. І тут я зависла! З одного боку, я досить ретельно обходила Флоренцію, мусила би теж там бути. Але ці картини Мазаччо й Ліппі такі знайомі, що вже не можу встановити - я бачила їх наживо чи знаю через культурний осмос. Мусила дзвонити матері, яку туди возила, і з'ясовувати в неї - у неї краща пам'ять, вона зазвичай пам'ятає маршрут. Нібито бачила наживо, так, but that rather proves the point, doesn't it).

Коротше, ця книжка - подекуди deeply flawed, але взагалі дуже цікава розмова про музейне функціонування мистецтва від захоплених співрозмовників.

[Kalliope · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is my second read of this, and I have enjoyed a great deal more. It presents and ongoing dialogue between the former Director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Philippe de Montebello (PdM), who headed the organisation for 31 years, from 1977 until 2008 and the art critic Martin Grayford (MG).

They meet at various times and in different museums/cities such as Paris (Louvre), Madrid (Prado and the Church of St Antony of Padua), Florence (Santa Croce, Bargello), London (British Museum and the Wallace Collection), and of course the Met itself, as it suited their respective travel plans and calendar.

Along the nicely illustrated chapters we hear their opinions (and PdM’s seemed always more interesting than MG’s), on both art (specific works, genres, styles and artists) as well as on other more general issues. I was delighted to read about PdM’s personal preferences, such as Assyrian sculpture, Velázquez, Poussin, Giotto, Dürer, Titian, and was surprised by his less enthusiastic interest in Dutch painting, except for Vermeer. His remarks are captivating, due to his acutely fine eye and depth and width of his knowledge. Eventually it comes across that he is drawn by quiet and still images, such as those by Chardin and some Asian sculptures.

As a museum director, it is of no surprise that he makes a solid defence of the role of museums as depository, educational and research centres. Issues such as displacement, context, and provenance and very elegantly analysed and I found myself agreeing with him in all respects.

[Mary Ronan Drew · Rating 4 out of 5]

Director of New York City's Metropolitan Museum of Art from 1977 to 2008, Philippe de Montebello, who was born a French count in Paris, is about as knowledgeable about the fine arts as anyone out there, and just as opinionated. I don't think I exaggerate much when I say he would have anyone who wishes to be admitted to his museum pursue a serious art history course and pass a difficult and lengthy quiz before being allowed to visit. He is emphatically not a democrat. He does not believe art museums are there for the masses. People should have to work at viewing art.

"I use the word "work" in my approach to art deliberately," he says. "This may seem odd to those who are accustomed to the populist message of museums that, eager to beef up their numbers by promoting their collections as a form of entertainment, go out of their way to suggest that the art within and the experience of everyday life are one. They don't want to intimidate the visitor with anything too grand, and above all, studiously avoid implying that there may be somewhere sensitivities higher than our own."

Since I agree with many of his out-of-fashion but strongly held opinions, I have always looked for books in the Met catalog with his name as co-author. He pulled his punches while he was the head of the museum. Now he is free to declare his hierarchical stance on art. Knowing now how much I did not know back in the 1960s when I first started going to the Met, I would agree that I should not have been allowed in to block the view of people who really knew what they were looking at. On the other hand, I learned much of what I now know about art from visiting the Louvre every Sunday (back when it was free to students) for weeks on end.

Some paintings, some painters, some genres of art are simply better than others, says de Montebello. Some cultures have produced more and better art than others. And it is the job of directors of museums and teachers of art history to point this out to people, to teach them to understand and believe Matthew Arnold: "Culture is the best that has been thought and said."

de Montebello declares without hesitation that the best painting in the world is in the Prado: Velazquez' "The Surrender at Breda." And when it comes to painting he comes close to saying the Prado is the finest museum in the world. All those Titians, Goyas, and Velazquez.

Rendez-vous with Art is co-written with Martin Gayford, an equally but very differently opinionated British Art Critic whose books are very well thought of in art circles. In this book the two men wander over a couple of years and a couple of continents visiting museums and churches and talking about what they see -- at the Louvre; the Prado; the museums, palaces, and churches of Florence; and at various other venues, including the Met.

[Peter Tillman · Rating 4 out of 5]

A witty, informative, leisurely and accessible book about art & art museums. If you read the two top-rated reviews here, you will have a good idea if the book is for you. Recommended to me by my wife, and we do have similar tastes ;-]

If you have access, here's an excellent professional review:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/book-rev... (Paywalled. I'm happy to email a copy to non-subscribers)
" . . . a humane and engaging volume aimed squarely at the educated lay reader, a series of condensed and edited conversations between Mr. de Montebello and the British art journalist Martin Gayford. The conversations were prompted by their travels to museums, collections and other destinations in seven cities in the United States and Europe: Florence, London, Paris, Madrid, Rotterdam, The Hague and New York. . . .

Art-world movers and shakers frequently visit museums during off-hours to avoid the distraction of crowds. In "Rendez-Vous With Art," Messrs. de Montebello and Gayford gamely queue up for admission alongside the general public. Humor ensues when Mr. de Montebello discovers that his Metropolitan Museum credentials—which no doubt identify him as Lord High Guardian of the Universe—befuddle many European ticket takers even as Mr. Gayford blithely waves a press card to breeze through the turnstiles. Such moments lend the book a charming air of companionability . . ."

[Tawney · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received this book compliments of Thames & Huson through the Goodreads First Reads program.

The jacket quotes Philippe de Montebello saying that this book is about the experience of art and it raises issues the viewer might not consider when looking at a work. Montebello, the former director of the Met and the art critic Martin Gayford discuss these matters during trips to various European museums and the Met in New York.

How much does it matter that a work is no longer seen in the location for which it was intended? What about a copy, one made to preserve the original? What about distance, lack of tactile experience, crowds, or aching feet? These things affect the experience just as an understanding of art history, composition or what's in vogue. There is plenty to consider, about how you experience art, how museums present it and reproductions online and in print.

As these topics are addressed the two are also looking at specific works and talk of them also. This isn't academic either. It is primarily Montebello explaining what he finds special about a piece and it's quite nice to know that some of his reaction is emotional.

Many of the works discussed are reproduced and yes they are fairly small, but large illustrations would raise the cost of the book. The quality of the book itself is really good. Good thick paper, nicely bound.This is a book to be browsed again and again and it is made to last.

[Auriea]

Enjoyable. Like strolling through museum halls with two, very knowledgable, rich, uncles. But also leads you to look up images of the places and find out more about the mentioned artworks. Brought back memories of standing with those artworks in those places myself. And made mental notes to notice more next time I'm there.

[Tamara · Rating 5 out of 5]

Philippe de Montebello may be a bit old-school in terms of art historical theory, but the man has always made me laugh with his witty banter and way with words. When they are discussing the more commonly shown pieces of artwork it is a bit ho-hum, but I really enjoyed the book when they took in the lesser shown works. You can read about Michelangelo in any art history textbooks, but Bruyn the Elder - not so much. That's where this book shines - in the thoughtful forays into the lesser known works and artists.

[Holly · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love a good art book that is an experience in itself. The smokey blue cover caught my eye on the bookstore shelf, but its beautiful shade is not rendered authentically in the picture goodreads provides. The cover is creamy in texture like the thick vanilla colored pages. The paper choice lends itself to the illustrations, which are not smooth and glossy...they appear to have some depth as a result. The content was quite a treat as it consists of conversations of two prominent figures in the art world as they visit locations of the works they feature. Hearing professionals in conversation about art who possess a life-time of experience and a true passion for their field is wonderful...they convey not just a sense of experiencing the work but are keenly aware of the context of space, geographically as well as within the museum. One can learn a lot by listening to people who make a living observing the finest works of human creation. I wonder almost that I might be able to learn about awareness in general, awareness rarely given the time to cultivate. Furthermore, one can also learn HOW to look at art by observing these two do it. While I would categorize myself as a complete novice, I am not completely unaware as to how one should approach looking at something. That is, widening the aperture beyond sight and absorbing the work or structure by losing oneself and sense momentarily from the material world and focusing that sense on the object of consideration. Phillipe de Montebello briefly details the way previous generations looked at art by quoting Goethe: "What I have not drawn, I have not seen." Museums at one time were visited by people with sketchbooks in hand (this did not just occur in the museum, the sketchbook was often used on walks and retreats into nature...along with journal writing which was also commonplace once upon a time by educated people). Drawing used to be an element of higher learning and I cannot help but think that perhaps I need to acquire a notebook of my own and find out what I have been missing. However, this cannot be done in many museum settings today that house some of the greatest art known. This is discussed as well and also how problematic it is to walk by a snap a photo on the phone for later perusal. I have since learned why this is a grave error I have been guilty of committing many a time. This book is not art history as it is typically written, this is a real "let-go" and experience art by two gentlemen fluent in its language. Incomparable for someone like me who experiences art from afar and only bumps into mostly theoretical approaches to it.

[Missy · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of my most favorite pastimes is to walk through a museum with a friend, discussing the art, sharing our insights and impressions. Now, imagine that your friend is Philippe de Montebello, legendary art historian and director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art for more than three decades. In Rendez-Vous with Art, Philippe de Montebello and art critic Martin Gayford walk through galleries, churches, and sites around the world, discussing art, museums, and collecting. While Montebello is an able administrator, shrewd negotiator, skillful fund raiser, and learned historian, he is at heart a lover of art. And this is what makes Rendez-Vous with Art such a delightfully accessible book; it celebrates the act of looking and learning. I must admit that I didn't finish the book ... for a good reason. As I browsed through it, I read some chapters fully and skimmed others. Ultimately, I returned the book to the library, planning to buy a copy for my own collection. I want to go museum-hopping with Mr. Montebello and Mr. Gayford again, this time while taking notes in the margins and looking up images online.

[Catherine · Rating 4 out of 5]

I actually think that both art lovers and art novices would enjoy this book. For the former, it's an opportunity to remember Mr. de Montebello's immense contribution to the art world and to be reminded of the important (if constantly shifting) role of museums in civic life. Art novices I think would enjoy the way in which he (and his interlocutor Martin Gayford) places key works of art in the context of their geographical and historical creation: how do we look at art not just in terms of aesthetic excellence? What is to be lost, or gained, by removing a tryptych from a church and into a museum? How did centuries of European war and conquest enhance the significance of art works? How important are art patrons? This enjoyable and reflective book, while thought-provoking, should be savored slowly, like a stroll through the galleries.

[Sue Dale · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book made me long for a wander through a gallery, any gallery, with a friend. COVID has meant looking at art from a distance, and what this book reinforces is that there is nothing to equate being present in front of the real thing. Philippe & Martin take us on a worldwide rendezvous with art, talking as friends, discussing aspects and contexts.

[Kathryn · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sublime art conversations in some of the most important galleries of Europe. Beautiful photographs. Wonderful book.

[Debbie Menk · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is so beautiful. It is a collection of conversations between two prominent art curators as they meet in museums around the world (over some period of time) talking about art, their experiences of art, and curating art for museums.

The book is brilliantly written and fascinating. I long wanted to understand more about art, and more particularly, how to experience an art museum (I go often to various museums). I learned so much about art, but the book is not academic or meant particularly to be educational. It is a collection of highly intelligent conversations that stimulate the mind’s thinking about art.

This summer has been my summer of art. I’ve always been drawn to art museums, but I’ve never reached a deep understanding of art. I feel like this book has led me on a pleasant saunter through the world’s greatest art museums with gentle and kindly, knowledgeable guides helping one structure one’s thoughts. This book is what I’ve been looking for and would never have believed that someone could write.

I wish I could have joined them on these visits. But this book is the next best thing.

[D · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rendez-vous with art is a series of conversations between Philip de Montebello, former director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and art critic Martin Gayford. The conversations are light and loosely structured. They mostly reflect on specific art works they observed together in great museums and the concept of museums themselves. While I can't say I learned a tremendous amount from the book I enjoyed the feeling of participating in serious, knowledgeable conversations about art and a little bit about how museum curators see the world

[Ray LaManna · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a different type of art book...half art appreciation and half art history. And it is written by my favorite art connoisseur Philippe De Montebello, who was for 31 years the Director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.

De Montebello comments on over 75 works of art from museums all over the world...his ideas are refreshing and challenging. If you want to delve deeper into what art means and says to us...this is the book for you.

[Isabel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having my own small portal into the world of The Met and a brief moment of time having spoken with PdM, I was quite interested in this book. For me it raises questions about my own interpretations and experiences with works of art. I question what it means to be a sophisticated viewer, just as I question what it means to be a sophisticated listener. The questioning, leading my into greater depths... which is I suspect, the entire intent of the book.

[Meg · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was just so yummy - best enjoyed slowly, this was a journey from museum to museum around the world with an art critic and the former director of the Met. I loved the way the book made us feel like a fly on the wall listening to some of the highest minds in art having conversations in front of masterpieces. Makes me want to get into a museum with all the thought-provoking ideas in my head now!

[Joshua Flint · Rating 5 out of 5]

A walk through some of the greatest art in history with the former head of the Metropolitan Museum of Art and a terrific arts writer, who create a causal and accessible dialogue about the power of human imagination. Interwoven with some candor about the role of museums and their ever evolving role to provide a space for everyone to marvel at creative expression and cultural history.

[Pat · Rating 5 out of 5]

Reading this is like eavesdropping on two old art devotees walking around great museums talking about works they love. Nice reminder about the greatness of Velazquez’s portraits and Goya generally. I was moved by the Neo-Assyrian reliefs in the BM. Less persuaded by the discussion of the 18th French century art (Watteau, etc), maybe it hasn’t clicked yet.

[Elena · Rating 3 out of 5]

A bit self indulgent at times, I found discussions of repatriation the most interesting part. A lot of this could be condensed, but then this book wouldn't have the appeal of being transcribed conversations in museums of European capitals. This was like a podcast on art where you ~had~ to travel to see each work live to meaningfully discuss it.

[Christy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Loved this read. A fascinating look at the minds of two long- time art lovers and their walks through museums around the world. If you love art on any level, this is worth your time.

[Edie Lee · Rating 5 out of 5]

Two large figures go about looking at art in a variety of places discussing art in various contexts. Highly recommended.

[Ewa · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book but it was not as good as other books by Martin Gayford I had a pleasure to read ("Man with a Blue Scarf" or "Bigger Message. Conversations with David Hockney")

[Veronika · Rating 5 out of 5]

I learned a lot about art in the context of its place in museums

[A. H. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting concept, but the book would have conveyed more info via a traditional art-history approach.

[Patty · Rating 4 out of 5]

“If we stand in front of a work of art twice, at least one party – the viewer or the subject - will be somewhat transformed on the second occasion. Works of art mutate through time, albeit slowly, as they are cleaned or ‘conserved’, or as their constituent materials age.

…We, the viewers, however, are even more fluctuating.”

It has been more than a month since I read this book. A friend found it through serendipity and something I said to her made her recommend this fascinating book. I am so glad she recommended this to me. I would have never found it on my own.

This is a conversation that takes place between the former director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art and a renowned art critic. They visit a number of art museums and talk about specific pieces that they view. I know that this description does not do justice to the book.

Maybe this will provide more clarity to how I feel about this conversation and the book: I am still thinking about what transpires between these two men. I think my view of art and museums has been changed forever. I went to the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts last week and the art I viewed looked different to me.

De Montebello (the curator) is extremely knowledgeable about art and about how museums have changed over the years. It never occurred to me to think about the relationship between museums and people’s view of art. Not only the relationship, but how that connection has changed over time. You may not agree with de Montebello about what is good art, but you won’t be sorry that you heard his opinion.

If you have any interest in art, I highly recommend this book to you. The conversations are amazing, the art pictured is beautiful and what you might learn about art, museums and people may help you see all three differently.

[Will · Rating 4 out of 5]

Whilst the works discussed are very beautiful, the undoubted star of this delightful book is Philippe de Montbello himself. As director of the Met for over 30 years (1977-2008), he is the longest serving head of a major museum and is a doyen of the art world. For anyone interested in art, his thoughts and ideas are certainly worth reading.

He and the art critic Martin Gayford meet up in New York and Europe when chance affords, visit prominent museums and discuss the things they see, as well wider ideas relating to how works of art are viewed and engaged with in the museum setting.

The works discussed are all pre-1850 and mainly European but there are brief and stimulating forays into African, Oceanic, Asian, Egyptian and Mesopotamian works.

Philippe's ideas are thought-provoking, illuminating and often witty. He is modest and self-deprecating but never worried about steering the conversation in the direction he wants or to unequivocally say what his beliefs are. His knowledge is vast and comes from a life-time spent thinking and looking at art.

He will make you want to grab a companion, head to the nearest gallery and start up a conversation about whatever you see.

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm a huge fan of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (one of my favorite places in the world, really), and I can't think of better company than Philippe de Montebello, the Met's former director, for a walk through some art museums. This book presents his musings about art, along with the thoughts of art critic Martin Gayford, and both raise interesting comments and questions about the role of museums and the experience of art - in museums and out of them. This is an interesting and thought-provoking read for anyone interested in art and art museums. I'm just sorry I couldn't see the art works and spaces being discussed, but at least there are pictures - just enough to give a basic context for their discussion.

[Maureen · Rating 3 out of 5]

An alternate proposal for this book's title was "The Art Museum: An Imperfect Construct". A more descriptive title than the one chosen because the focus did seem to me to be more about the drawbacks of viewing art in museums.

I found this book a bit repetitious and was disappointed in many of the descriptions (or lack) of the artworks. Repeatedly, the paint was described as creamy without much other elaboration.

I can't agree with the quote on the back cover that the book that "it's not a book ... about museums in general, . . . The subject is more the contents, works of art." To me, the reverse is true.