Check out these Article Contest photographs:
The Panorama of the City of New York, model seen from the west
Image by Chris Devers
Just a few years in the past, I got to see a 1:1500 scale model of London at the Building Centre there. It is a big scale model of the coronary heart of the metropolis in three dimensions, with representations of most buildings, landmarks, parks, the Thames, and the (at the time but to be constructed) Olympic Park.
It’s extraordinarily spectacular.
And it’s as nothing in comparison with The Panorama at the Queens Museum of Art.
Here’s two panorama pictures to offer a way of the scale:
• view from the “west”
• view from the ”south”
Quoting from the Museum’s web page on the The Panorama of the City of New York:
The Panorama is the jewel in the crown of the assortment of the Queens Museum of Art. Built by Robert Moses for the 1964 World’s Fair, partly as a celebration of the City’s municipal infrastructure, this 9,335 sq. foot architectural model contains each single constructing constructed earlier than 1992 in all 5 boroughs; that could be a complete of 895,000 particular person constructions.
The Panorama was constructed by a staff of 100 individuals working for the nice architectural model makers Raymond Lester Associates in the three years earlier than the opening of the 1964 World’s Fair. In planning the model, Lester Associates referred to aerial images, insurance coverage maps, and a spread of different City materials; the Panorama needed to be correct, certainly the preliminary contract demanded lower than one p.c margin of error between actuality and the model. The Panorama was one of the most profitable sights at the ‘64 Fair with a each day common of 1,400 individuals taking benefit of its 9 minute simulated helicopter journey round the City.
After the Fair the Panorama remained open to the public, its initially deliberate use as an city planning instrument seemingly forgotten. Until 1970 all of the adjustments in the City have been precisely recreated in the model by Lester’s staff. After 1970 only a few adjustments have been made till 1992, when once more Lester Associates modified over 60,000 constructions to convey it up-to-date.
In the Spring of 2009 the Museum launched its Adopt-A-Building program with the set up of the Panorama’s latest addition, Citi Field, to proceed for the ongoing care and upkeep of this beloved treasure.
The Queens Museum of Art has a program providing you with the alternative to “purchase” NYC actual property on The Panorama of the City of New York for as little as . To learn how you can become involved click here.
We hope that you’ll take time to get pleasure from the Panorama of the City of New York.
The Panorama of the City of New York is sponsored by the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs and New York State Assembly members Mike Gianaris, Mark Weprin, Audrey Pheffer, Nettie Mayersohn and Ivan Lafayette, The New York Mets Foundation and the supporters of the Adopt-A-Building Program.
View the profitable photos from our Gala 2011 Panorama Picture Contest!
View pictures from our Gala 2011 Photo booth, May 12, 2011!
View pictures of the Panorama on its Flickr page
Add your own pictures to our Panorama Flickr Group!
Quoting now from The Panorama part in Wikipedia’s Queens Museum of Art article:
The greatest identified everlasting exhibition at the Queens Museum is the Panorama of the City of New York which was commissioned by Robert Moses for the 1964 World’s Fair. A celebration of the City’s municipal infrastructure, this 9,335-square-foot (867.2 m2) architectural model contains each single constructing constructed earlier than 1992 in all 5 boroughs; that could be a complete of 895,000 particular person constructions. The Panorama was constructed by a staff of 100 individuals working for the architectural model makers Raymond Lester Associates in the three years earlier than the opening of the 1964 World’s Fair. The Panorama was one of the most profitable sights at the ’64 Fair with a each day common of 1,400 individuals taking benefit of its 9 minute simulated helicopter journey round the City. After the Fair the Panorama remained open to the public and till 1970 all of the adjustments in the City have been precisely recreated in the model by Lester’s staff. After 1970 only a few adjustments have been made till 1992, when once more Lester Associates was employed to replace the model to coincide with the re-opening of the museum. The model makers modified over 60,000 constructions to convey it up-to-date.
In March 2009 the museum introduced the intention to replace the panorama on an ongoing foundation. To increase funds and draw public consideration the museum will permit people and builders to have correct fashions made of buildings newer than the 1992 replace created and added in trade for a donation. Accurate fashions of smaller condo buildings and personal houses, now represented by generic fashions, may also be added. The twin towers of the World Trade Center might be changed when the new buildings are created, the museum has chosen to permit them to stay till building is full relatively than representing an empty gap. The first new buildings to be added was the new Citi Field stadium of the New York Mets. The model of the previous Shea Stadium will proceed to be displayed elsewhere in the museum.
Quoting now from the explanatory sign at the exhibit:
THE PANORAMA OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
The Panorama of the City of New York, the world’s largest scale model of its time, was the creation of Robert Moses and Raymond Lester. Presented in the New York City Pavilion as the metropolis’s premiere exhibit at the 1964/65 New York World’s Fair, it was meant afterwards to function an city planning instrument. Visitors skilled the Panorama from a simulated “helicopter” journey that travelled round perimeter or from a glass-enclosed balcony on the second ground, whereas information commentator Lowell Thomas offered audio commentary on “The City of Opportunity.” One of the “helicopter” vehicles is now on view in the Museum’s everlasting exhibition, A Panoramic View: A History of the New York City Building and Flushing Meadows Corona Park.
Constructed at the Lester Associates workshop in Westchester, New York, the Panorama accommodates 273 separate sections, many of that are four-by-ten-foot rectangular panels. They are composed of Formica flakeboard topped with urethane foam slabs from which the typography was carved. Lester Associates’ workers consulted geological survey maps, aerial images, and books of City insurance coverage maps, to precisely render the City’s streets, highways, parks, and buildings. Once the Panorama’s modules have been accomplished at Lester Associates’ workshop, they have been assembled on website in the New York City Building. It took greater than 100 staff, three years to finish the model.
Built on a sale of 1:1,200 (1 inch equals 100 toes), the Panorama occupies 9.335 sq. toes and precisely replicates New York City together with all 320 sq. miles of its 5 boroughs and 771 miles of shoreline, in addition to the constructed surroundings. It contains miniature vehicles, boats, and an airplane touchdown and taking off at LaGuardia Airport.
The majority of the City’s buildings are offered by standardized model models made from wooden and acrylic. Of greater than 895,000 particular person constructions, 25,000 are custom-made to approximate landmarks corresponding to skyscrapers, massive factories, faculties, museums, and main church buildings. The quantity of element potential on most buildings is proscribed; at a scale of 1 inch to 100 toes, the model of the Empire State Building measures solely 15 inches. The most correct constructions on the Panorama are its 35 main bridges, that are finely made of brass and formed by a chemical milling course of.
The model is colour coded to point varied sorts of land use. The darkish inexperienced areas are parks. Parkways are additionally edged in darkish inexperienced. Mint inexperienced sections are associated to transportation together with prepare and bus terminals. The pink rectangles that dot the City present the areas of leisure areas together with playgrounds and tennis and basketball courts. Clusters of purple buildings are indicative of publicly sponsored housing.
Red, blue, inexperienced, yellow, and white coloured lights have been put in on the floor of the Panorama in 1964 to establish constructions housing City companies regarding safety, schooling, well being, recreation, commerce, welfare, and transportation. Overhead lights have been designed to run in a daybreak to nightfall cycle, and the nighttime impact is enhanced by ultraviolet paint, illuminated by blacklight.
In 1992, the City started a renovation of the Queens Museum of Art and the Panorama. Using their authentic strategies, Lester Associates up to date the Panorama with 60,000 adjustments. In the present instalation, designed by Rafael Viñoly Architects, guests observe the course of the authentic “helicopter” journey on an ascending ramp that permits them to expertise the Panorama of the City of New York from Multiple Perspectives.
IMG_3324N Jan de Beer. 1475-1528. Anvers. Triptyque de l’Adoration des bergers. Triptych of the Adoration of the Shepherds. Vers 1515. Cologne Wallraf Richartz Museum.
Image by jean louis mazieres
Jan de Beer. 1475-1528. Anvers. Triptyque de l’Adoration des bergers. Triptych of the Adoration of the Shepherds. Vers 1515. Cologne Wallraf Richartz Museum.
L’ART ET LE BEAU
Pendant des millénaires, en Europe, et dans toutes les civilisations, "le Beau" a été un however et un critère de l’Art, notamment en peinture.
1° Le Beau était le however poursuivi par l’artiste quand il peignait un tableau. De l’époque médiévale à l’Art Moderne, l’artiste a toujours eu pour finalité le Beau. Même quand il entendait peindre une scenario dramatique, ou horrible comme les événements de la ardour du Christ (Retable d’Issenheim) ou l’Enfer ( Bouts, Bosch). Même quand il a entendu peindre les horreurs de la guerre, comme Jacques Callot, Goya ou Otto Dix.
2° Le Beau était reconnu comme tel par consensus.
Comme l’a écrit Mikel Dufrenne dans un article de l’encyclopédie Universalis, le Beau est défini par trois critères que l’on dira objectifs : L’opinion des élites, l’opinion commune de la inhabitants, le temps..
Une excellente définition, pratique, pragmatique, qui ne se noie pas dans les ideas abstraits, la recherche d’une Essence du Beau, et utilise un langage parfaitement compréhensible.
Ces définitions laissent bien sûr la place à l’opinion individuelle et aux goûts de chacun. Comme l’a écrit aussi Mikel Dufrenne dans le même article : "L’œuvre d’art s’impose avec la force de l’évidence, pour le bonheur de qui la contemple."
C’est un quatrième critère, plus subjectif, qui varie en fonction des individus. Telle oeuvre peut procurer du bonheur à telle personne, et pas, ou moins, à telle autre. Mais d’une half le however essentiel de l’artiste était de procurer un bonheur à son public, et ce bonheur était ressenti par une majorité d’hommes de milieux différents.
L’attitude totalement relativiste qui consiste à dire qu’il n’y a pas de critère du Beau, et que tout est affaire de goût personnel, est fausse, par excès, et par méconnaissance des réalités historiques établies. Le Beau est un fait d’expérience. Le Beau est un sentiment de satisfaction, partagé par une massive fraction d’une société, et confirmé par le temps.
Ce qui a changé avec l’Art Contemporain, progressivement, mais très nettement à partir des années 1950, c’est que le Beau n’a plus été un however de l’artwork. Le Laid a même été revendiqué comme une recherche légitime de l’artwork.
Comme le constate très réalistement l’historien d’artwork Ernst Gombrich, l’artwork est devenu "une aventure aux confins de l’impossible et l’art du laid."
L’adhésion idéologique de l’Art Contemporain au Laid est un constat banal, qui a été fait de multiples fois, et qui a été pleinement revendiqué par tous ses théoriciens.
Le critique d’artwork Michel Tapié (1909-1987) constate dans les années 1950-60 que "l’Art Moderne -entendez Art Contemporain- est né le jour où l’idée d’Art et celle de Beauté se sont trouvées disjointes." Il ne critique pas cette disjonction, bien au contraire il la constate et la justifie. "nous avons changé de valeurs".
Cela ne veut pas dire que cela a été pour le mieux ! Il est très significatif que toute l’Europe des Musées distingue les Musées des "Beaux Arts" des "Musées d’Art Contemporain". C’est l’officialisation du divorce de l’Art et du Beau.
Certains critiques commencent à contester vivement l’Art Contemporain officiel. Celui exposé dans les musées. L’Art d’Etat.
Jean Louis Harrouel a proposé une analyse très pertinente, pleine de bon sens, politiquement, économiquement et idéologiquement très fondée de l’Art Contemporain dans son ouvrage "L’Art contemporain, la Grande Falsification". ( Jean Cyrille Godefroy 2009)
En 1999 Jean Monneret avait déjà écrit : « L’art contemporain ? Tous les artistes vivants font partie de l’artwork contemporain. Ce sont les artistes qui font l’artwork. Tous les artistes. Librement !
Or, l’État veut faire croire au public qu’il n’y a qu’un artwork digne d’intérêt, l’artwork dit « contemporain », c’est-à-dire l’artwork d’État. En artwork dit « contemporain », moins il y a à voir, plus il y a à dire ! Dans une exposition d’artwork contemporain, une gaine d’aération, le matériel de secours ou le carrelage des sanitaires se confondent souvent avec les œuvres présentées. La query alors est, où est l’œuvre ? Tant l’harmonie est parfaite entre le contenant et le contenu.
En réalité, l’artwork d’État écarte arbitrairement l’artwork des meilleurs artistes. La démocratie exigerait que l’État, soucieux de l’argent du contribuable, rendît compte de la réalité contemporaine dans toute sa diversité, sans exclusion…"
A la différence de Jean Monneret je n’accuserai pas seulement l’Etat, ou ses fonctionnaires, qui sont, pour la plupart, tout à fait manipulés par plus idéologues et plus puissants qu’eux. Ces décideurs apparents ne font que se conformer à un artistiquement right dont la supply est ailleurs, bien plus haut et bien plus secrète. Ce pourquoi je préfère dire que l’Art Contemporain des musées est un Art Académique ou Officiel.
ART AND BEAUTIFUL
For millennia, in Europe, and in all civilizations, "the Beautiful" was a purpose and a criterion of artwork, significantly portray.
1 The Beautiful was the intention pursued by the artist when he painted an image. From medieval instances to Modern Art, the artist has allways had intented the Beautiful. Even when he meant to color a dramatic scenario, or horrible, as the occasions of the Passion of Christ (Issenheim Altarpiece) or Hell (Bouts, Bosch). Even when he heard paint the horrors of struggle, as Jacques Callot, Goya and Otto Dix.
2. The Beautiful was acknowledged as such by consensus.
As Mikel Dufrenne wrote in an article in the Encyclopedia Universalis, the Beau is outlined by three standards aims: The opinion of elites, the widespread opinion of the inhabitants, the time.
An glorious definition, sensible, pragmatic, that doesn’t drown in summary ideas, the seek for an Essence of Beauty, and makes use of an comprehensible language.
These definitions depart the course as much as the particular person opinion and tastes. As written additionally Mikel Dufrenne in the similar article: "The work of art is imposed on all, with the strength of the evidence, to the delight of the beholder." It is a fourth criterion, extra subjective, which varies relying on people. Such work can convey happiness to such an individual, and never, or much less, to a different. But firstly, the main intention of the artist was to supply happiness to his viewers, and this happiness was felt by a majority of males of completely different backgrounds.
The totally relativistic angle of saying that there isn’t any criterion of Beautiful, and that every little thing is matter of private style, is fake, by extra and by ignorance of the established historic realities. The Beautiful is a reality of expertise. The Beautiful is a sense of satisfaction, shared by a big part of society, and confirmed by time.
What has modified with the Contemporary Art, step by step, however very clearly from the Nineteen Fifties is that Beautiful was now not a function of artwork. The Ugly has even been claimed as a reliable pursuit of artwork.
As famous very real looking artwork historian, Ernst Gombrich, the artwork has change into "an adventure to the borders of the impossible and the art of the ugly."
The ideological accession of Contemporary Art at the Ugly is a banal statement, which was achieved a number of instances, and has been totally claimed by its theorists.
The artwork critic Michel Tapié (1909-1987) notes that in 1950-60 "Contemporary Art is born on the day when the idea of Art and that of the beauty found disjointed." He doesn’t criticize this disjunction, on the opposite he finds and justifies it. "We have changed values."
This is to not say that it was for the greatest! It could be very important that every one of Europe Museum distinguishes between Museums of the "Beaux Arts" of the "Museum of Contemporary Art". This is the formalization of the divorce between the Art and the Beautiful.
Some critics are starting to strongly contest the official Contemporary Art. The one exhibited in the museums. The Art of State..
Jean Louis Harrouel has proposed a really pertinent evaluation, full of widespread sense, politically, economically and ideologically very based of Contemporary Art in his ebook "Contemporary Art, Great Falsification". (Jean Cyril Godefroy 2009)
In 1999 Jean Monneret had already written: "Contemporary artwork? All dwelling artists are half of the Contemporary Art. These are the artists who make artwork. All the artists. Freely!
But the State needs to imagine to the public that there it has solely an artwork, worthy of curiosity, the artwork says "Contemporary", that’s to say, the State Art. In artwork known as "Contemporary", the much less there may be to see, the extra there may be to say!
In a up to date artwork exhibition, a air flow duct, emergency gear or tile sanitary typically merge with the works offered. The query then is, the place is the work? As is ideal concord between the container and the content material.
In actuality, the artwork of State departs arbitrarily the artwork of the greatest artists. Democracy would require the State aware of thetaxpayers’ cash, ought to render account of up to date actuality in all its variety, with out exclusion … "
Contrary to Jean Monneret I don’t simply accuse the State or its officers, who’re utterly manipulated by ideologues and extra highly effective than they. These obvious choice makers adhere solely to an ideology of the Artistically Correct whose supply can be a lot greater and extra secret. That why I favor to say that the up to date artwork museum is an Academic Art, or Official Art.