I really enjoyed today’s visit to Musée d’Orsay and especially Paul’s tour. Keeping in mind Vanessa’s recommendation to examine the furniture, I was interested to discover that Odilon Redon’s furniture was in a separate space from his paintings. While his paintings were on the fifth floor, a prayer rug and a fire screen were on the second floor, in the space that felt considerably more domestic. I’m wondering about the narrative elements of this separation, as well as the logistical ones. What does separating Redon’s furniture from his paintings imply for viewers? How does this separation expand or limit our knowledge of the intersections between different art forms? And how does this (dis)continuity of narrative change or cement notions around this artist and others, as well as aspects of the museum more broadly?

On a different note, in the Gaudí exhibition I paid particular attention to the presence of photographs and was intrigued to see that they were rarely allowed to act alone. Rather, they showed a particular piece (oftentimes that was close by in the space) or a moment of historical construction. In other words, they acting as testaments to his work, as opposed to speaking for themselves. How can photography work both as testament and art in an exhibition dedicated to design?