I'm with ya. Most abstract artists don't have the talent to produce real art, so they puke on canvases and call it abstract. The suckers that buy this crap are just posers who want other people to think they're deep and inteligent. I work in a studio with an abstract artist, and believe me, when it comes to actually producing something realistic, a third grader could do better.
2007-10-25 12:32:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
While I quite like some of the contemporary art today,and I even paint some of it on occasion, I have to admit it.. you are right... "THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES".
It's a trend, an ongoing one. The Contemporary arts movement is very powerful and influential worldwide.
I had an exhibition cancelled at the last minute (eons ago) by a gallery controlled by said movement, they said my work wasn't any good. Funny, I was invited to hang my work on the same wall with Salvador Dali's originals in Paris just a few weeks later ! Sheesh.. just goes to show doesn't it !
Nope, no clothes on that Emperor at all !
Take heart, people who actually have talent.. there IS hope !
2007-10-26 00:34:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I wish someone would shell out the big bucks for my paintings, drawings and design but they don't. Abstract art is the breaking of rules and norms in the creative realm to make you think instead of having the images neatly detailed and handed to you. It is not for everyone. It is successful even if you are disgousted by it, or question its place in artistic society or just plain don't get it. It has caused a response and that is what makes a piece a success even if bad. It is more emotive and transcendental than traditional or more accepted ways of presenting and artists vision
2007-10-25 11:32:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by inkgddss 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
the other type of painting--not "abstract" painting-- is "representative" paining. that means that the painting represents something in the world that's recognizable: a bowl of fruit, people, a landscape, etc.
but when you look at a representative painting, you'll notice that the objects in it are arranged very deliberately, so that they balance out the different parts of the picture. you'll notice that there is light and dark, and these areas are deliberately arranged as well. you'll notice that colors are chosen carefully, to harmonize or clash with each other.
paintings of landscapes or people or objects have an overall movement in them, depending upon how the objects are arranged in the painting. for example, the objects can be arranged in a spiral, so that your eye moves through the painting in a spiral.
they also have mood: a very dark painting using lots of greys and blues will have a somber or melancholy mood, whereas a painting using bright colors and splashy shapes will have a cheerful or energetic mood.
representative painting tries to address all of these artistic problems WHILE also representing a scene or person, or bowl of fruit.
but if you think about it, you don't HAVE to represent landscapes or flowers or people, to play with form, line, composition, color, and movement. you can just do this directly, by putting blocks of color onto the canvas, or splashing, or dripping, or swirling paint.
jackson pollock did with his paint drips what thousands of landscape and cityscape painters have done ... only without the landscape or cityscape. mark rothko, a painter famous for painting two or three solid blocks of color on a painting, like you described above, did with his color blocks what thousands of portrait painters have done ... only without the portrait.
have you ever tried to sing along to instrumental music? some songs have lyrics that you can sing, and some pieces of music have no lyrics, they're just music. representative art is like a song: you can sing along. there's an everyday meaning to the song.
abstract art is like the instrumental piece of music. you can't sing along. there's no everyday meaning. but it's still music. it's still meaningful.
2007-10-25 11:24:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by sweetness 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
I agree with you! I think it is basically a fad that has never died out for one reason or another. It is shocking to me that someone can literally throw some paint on a canvas, and call it art. And then people will pay millions for it!
2007-10-25 11:11:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
i might take it as a competent component, she in all risk isnt asserting something simply by fact she desires to confirm the place you are going to take your paintings on your guy or woman. She in all risk sees which you have have been given have been given a superb strategies and she or he's fascinated in the way you arive on the places your strategies takes you. [x]melanieinuyasha
2016-10-14 01:08:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The big deal is when someone appreciate a composition with a focus on internal structure or form and others agrees with it.
2007-10-25 11:22:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Winona 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Abstract art isn't just slopped down. It has balance and everything, but some people just can't see any beauty of it. Marble is pretty, right? Thats what they are thinking.
2007-10-25 11:16:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by blazikin89 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
I know!! I mean half of those paintings are a bunch of scribbles.
2007-10-25 11:15:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by . 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Do you like JAZZ? that is abstract music. some people like it some don't but if you don't that doesn't keep it from being music.
2007-10-28 08:12:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Lyn B 6
·
0⤊
2⤋