Thread: Abstract Art
View Single Post
Unread 8 Jul 2006, 04:44   #1
Nodrog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,476
Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Abstract Art

lol lines on a canvas

For quite some time I hated abstract/non-representational art, because I associated it primarily with pieces like the above (and this and this). But I've come to realise that this is unfair; while I still hold that 90% of abstract art is shit, I have to admit that 90% of acclaimed 'traditional' art is also shit. Regardless of how well painted it is, a picture of a bowl of fruit is still a bowl of fruit. Or a sunflower. And no matter how you want to slice it, an exquisitely painted haystack remains a painting of a haystack. The pleasure I find in representational art comes from seeing a concrete illustration of something I value (like this or this), and I would quite happily write off the whole enterprise of reproducing dull real-world objects as being fairly artistically bankrupt (although it may produce nice decorative pieces). When it comes to representation, I find content far more important than form.

My main problem with abstract art was that I believed it to be an enormous realisation of the fable about the emperor's new clothes. And in fairness, it probably is; I think that most proclaimed art lovers/critics would struggle to pass a double blind test that involved distinguishing new works of critically acclaimed art from paintings produced by college students. But the herd-mentality shown by many people associated with a field doesnt justify dismissing it outright. Rather than judging abstract art based on worst pieces, it makes more sense to judge it on its best, and I find beauty in this. And in this*. And this and this*. Like music, I struggle to explain what it is that makes me like these particular paintings - although I can come up with some justification for my feelings, I can easily find counterexamples (I claim to dislike this song because it is boring and does nothing new, yet I find this other verse/chorus/verse rock song to be brilliant. I dont like this piece of music because it is too minimalist, but here is another minimalist work that I love. And so on.).

I think my change of heart occurred largely because I forced myself to stop mentally comparing abstract art to traditional paintings; while I always liked some abstract pieces, there was a feeling inside me almost like guilt - it just seemed wrong to rate a piece that was essentially just pretty colours splattered on a canvas above a 'proper' work of art, which required the artist to dedicate his life to mastering the skills required to reproduce real-world objects accurately. But now I would say that the word 'art' itself is somewhat misleading, since classifying representational and non-representational paintings together makes them appear to have more in common than they actually do; I'd now say that they are completely seperate disciplines which have about as much in common as poetry and fiction-writing. In a sense, abstract paintings remind me more of music than they do of representational pieces - if someone wants to hold that non-representational lines and colours arranged in space are incapable of conveying emotion and beauty, then they should probably explain how non-representational sounds arranged in time manage to do it.

So, what are your thoughts on abstract painting? Can you find beauty here, or is it ultimately just lines and colours?



* These are fairly poor photos and the colours are a bit messed up, which is a pretty serious problem given that the colours are the whole point (I had to take the last photo myself with a mobile phone camera); the actual paintings are far nicer. But you can pretty much substitute anything from here or here.


edit: For reference, the paintings I linked to are (in order):

Mondrian - Composition With Two Lines
Rothko - White Over Red
Mondrian - Composition With Yellow Lines
Van Gogh - Sunflowers
Monet - one of his haystack pictures
Danielle Anjou - Yes (a sculpture rather than a painting, but shes probably my favourite living artist)
Nick Gaetano - Selfishness
Kandinsky - Composition VII
Matta - The Disasters of Mysticism
Kandinsky - Composition VIII
Kandinsky - Movement

Last edited by Nodrog; 8 Jul 2006 at 05:29.
Nodrog is offline   Reply With Quote