Hey everyone,

To all you art lovers out there, how would you compare SFMOMA and the de Young with the biggies in New York, DC, etc? Is there anything unique about them that makes them worth a visit if you've already visited similar, more famous museums in the U.S. and, say, Paris?

Thanks for your thoughts!

Are you serious?

I'm not sure how to take that, but yeah, I was.

Here is a thought: skip both and go to the Legion of Honor. Say hello to "the thinker", if you like Paris museums, you'll enjoy this one.

Haven't been to the new DeYoung yet, and don't enjoy the contemporary art, so can't advise on SFmoma.

Hello wandergrrl,

I've been to the new De Young recently. I loved the show I saw about the Arts & Crafts movement - saw a lot of Jugendstihl type items from Scandinavia that I'd never been aware of, plus stunning furniture from the Moser workshop in Vienna.

The view from the "Mayan" style tower is terrific, but the line to go up can be long.

All things considered, I've always had a grudge against the new DeYoung and the re-location of the Asian Arts Museum, which used to be in an adjacent building. The Asian's permanent collection is as impressive as ever, but its current location in grubby Civic Center doesn't hold a candle to the old galleries which had windows looking out to the Japanese Tea Garden, often framing statues with views of cherry blossoms or maple leaves - the living epitome of "borrowed scenery" indeed.

The Legion of Honor is in the most terrific setting with its views to the Golden Gate Bridge and the headlands. The porcelain on the lower level is beautifully displayed - sort of like being at Gump's except you can't buy anything!

Anyway, that's my very personal take on the city's museums - hope it is of help to you.

from the history of your questions, it seems you are compiling a guide book rather than taking a trip.

you have asked these sort of things in general terms for more than a year. why not just board the plane and see for yourself...or are you actually writing a guidebook without visiting?
sorry to be such a cynic, but i am mystified by such questions.

kerikeri

I actually live in the Bay Area, and so I do get to the city occasionally. When I do, after finding the time and finding a sitter, I want to be sure I have a good plan for what I want to do, so I read tons---the papers, of course, magazines, web sites, and even guide books. Lastly I come to places like this, where people who really know the city can answer my questions. I'm a local traveler, I guess. Sorry to seem suspicious.

In this case, if you live close, watch out which exhibits are on, or will be soon.

I prefer to go to a museum when there is an exhibit which interests me, in this case I see that temporary display and the permanent collection.

please accept my apologies!

I see nothing wrong with the question, and completely understand where the OP is coming from.

The Academy of Sciences does not equal to the biggies in London. The Legion of Honor is nice, though the Louvre by far is tops.

I would say that if I were a big museum buff, then I would think that the SF museums sort of pale in comparison to the ones in Paris and London. I am not sure about NYC. And I will also admit that I have not been to the De Young since its remodeling, nor have I been to the Asian Art Museum...but I remember the Public Library before the earthquake (where the Asian Art Museum now resides) and the architecture and marbeling was breathtakingly beautiful--the Library stacks were a bit scary, though.

Thanks, FainaAgain and dovima, and good point about the temporary exhibits. If I'm going to stand in line (god forbid) and possibly spend a few hours there, at least I could know the temp. stuff would be worthwhile, even if the permanent collection was a disappointment.

No worries, kerikeri. I was a bit taken aback, I have to say, though. Are people worried someone's trying to con them out of their opinion? What for? And who cares? I've learned a ton from this site, even if a computer is generating the questions.

Anyway, thanks again for your opinions. dovima, I wish I'd seen the Asian when it was still in the park!

The only truly world class museum collection in SF is the Asian in the Civic Center. Both MOMA and the deYoung are interesting spaces with some small collections--but their collections pale in comparison to museums in NYC like my personal favorite, the Metropolitan; or in DC, Paris, London, or Madrid.

Art however is very subjective, and I would never discourage anyone from visiting a museum. I think the deYoung's architecture alone is worth seeing.

As a child and teenager I went to the Main Public Library (which is now the Asian Art Museum) and I have also been to the Asian Art Museum when it was in the park (even took some nice painting classes). The architecture and the marbeling and the high, high, high ceilings of the new Asian Art Museum are far better than the layout of the old Asian Art Museum.

The only detriment to the old main public library was the "glass-like" see through floors of the stacks---I only went up there once, and the floors scared me a bit as a teen. They were also the most heavily damaged parts of the libary when the 89 earthquake happened.

Dear ilovetotravel,

I too vividly remember the Main Library and have a scary reminiscence of my own. I used to visit the stacks as a young 'un to study up on any of my numerous intellectual obsessions, such as shamanic religion of the reindeer-herding Artic peoples - you know, the kind of thing that my local branch might be a little short on. The Main's location and hours always attracted a fair number of down and out types, homeless and drunks needing a place to sleep whilst pretending to read. I was deep in the stacks one dark winter afternoon. Realizing it was near closing time, I shelved my books and started towards the central corridors. As I walked through the stacks, someone was following me.....and turning out the lights as they did so! I turned around and got a glimpse of a scruffy, tramp-type fella and then RAN. I shudder even now at this creepy memory.

My major beef about the current Asian museum is the cramped and poky nature of its temporary exhibit rooms. I went to the Geisha exhibit about a year ago and thought it was totally inadequate. Ditto the Tibetan exhibit earlier this year, although that show was rich in individual artifacts. Loved, loved, the ritual dance costume with ornaments (breastplate, crown, arm greaves) made entirely of human bones!

SF MoMA doesn't really compare to the MoMA in NYC (but then again, few do, including the Tate Modern in London).

But is it worth a visit? Sure.

The de Young does not compare to the Met or the Chicago Institute of Art. But it is new, is worth visiting for the building, and has a Meso-American and African collection that are beautifully displayed.

I'm totally new to the boards but I'm a bit surprised by this:

"you have asked these sort of things in general terms for more than a year. why not just board the plane and see for yourself...or are you actually writing a guidebook without visiting? sorry to be such a cynic, but i am mystified by such questions."

Aren't travel "professionals" supposed to solicit information from travel buffs, as well as from "official" sources? Wouldn't you rather read a travel guide that contained opinions other than that of the museum's administration and the writer's?

knitgal