Is Non-Representational Art a Cop-Out (or Decor)?
Friday January 26, 2007
Non-representational art is "a cop-out [and to] attribute to it such values as intellectual content or symbolism is optimistic at best. The seeking for appropriate composition, the play of light the balance of form and content and so on, and ultimately the hope of the creation of something beautiful, has no part in non-representational art. That should be the honest attitude, instead of investing daubs and splashes with meaning." "If the person that puts paint on canvas has to explain to me what it is then I feel it's not art but decor." The first is the opinion of Bill van Heerden and the second of Tony Vassallo, expressed in response to the blog Why Do Some People Hate Abstract Art So?.
Are they being too harsh? Are they not "getting" abstract art, or looking for meaning where none was ever intended? What do you think? Post a comment and let us know. Personally I think that representational art is often as decor too, it all depends on the interior designer's taste.
Are they being too harsh? Are they not "getting" abstract art, or looking for meaning where none was ever intended? What do you think? Post a comment and let us know. Personally I think that representational art is often as decor too, it all depends on the interior designer's taste.
Comments
“Abstract art is distinct from pattern-making in design, since it draws on the distinction between decorative art and fine art, in which a painting is an object of thoughtful contemplation in its own right.” - Wikipedea.
This being the case both representational painting and abstract painting should in order to be pleasing require the same inspiration and effort from the artist.
Tell that to Kline, Rothko, Pollock, et al.
The most crucial and, perhaps, most difficult thing to do with abstract art — as in life — is learning to see.
I am a tshirt artist and I paint on canvas also. I always wanted to paint on tshirts and clothing so my art would be seen by the masses, since people only have so many walls and always need clothes, and your market is more open. I paint abstract art very good. I took drawing classes and my nudes won in student shows and competitions.. But I prefer to paint abstract, if that is what nonrepresentational is. My colors and lines flow. Sure, I can paint like Norman Rockwell if I want to, but I choose not to. I paint what I “feel” and how it looks to me. I have been called a “commercial” artist for it, and looked down upon by the “fine art” crowd for it. I had a professor one time tell me that Toulouse-Lautrec was merely a “poster” artist. Well, I love Lautrec’s art. To me, art is art, but not to fine artists who have always tried to “put me in my place”. It always amazes me how artists can be so critical of art in different forms. I see art in everything around me. There is no differance between “fine” and “commercial” as long as it’s art and it’s good art. Art is art to me. I can copy Cezanne or Matisse on a tshirt or fabric or canvas. I especilly like to copy Munch’s “Scream” on tshirts, painting by hand. I don’t copy other’s work all the time, but it’s fun sometimes. So, if I copy fine art on a tshirt, I am still being “commercial”. People can just be critical about anything. Some people seem to enjoy it. I think it must make them think they know more about art, or they are better than others. I know I am a good artist and I have my own style and it sells and that’s all that matter’s to me. Art IS in the eye of the beholder and always shall be.
Alida Cornelius
I paint representational paintings of abstract ideas, they are Trompe l’oeils of nonrepresentational images i see and feel when i paint. I don’t need to explain them they simply are what they are.
Representational images can be Decor just as well as abstract images. If it is convincing as fine art, existing for its self, then it is not Decor even if it is bought and sold for such. Andy Warhol, for instanse, made representational images Decor.
Now sculpture on the other hand are simply the things one bumps into when looking at a painting. he he
I like representational art. The reason is this. it is art. The non representational “art” we see today, could be done by a chimp as well as a person. A chimp cand paint a cherry. We pwoplw are artists if we paint the real world because the other is not real.
Ricardo moss… Educate yourself a little before commenting on a subject like this. Have you picked up an art history book?
Non-representational art is about the process and the feelings it evokes. It is abstract in the sense that it doesn’t represent real objects in our world. However, most abstract art is representational in that it’s someone’s creative interpretation of what they want to visually convey of a real object. So, if the art looks like something, it’s most likely representational. E.g. Picasso, Monet, Chagall
P.S. Ditto on the chimp commenter above
Hello all! I found this because I have recently fallen in love with abstract art. I am an art major at Pepperdine University and I have a great teacher that nudged me a bit into the non-representational world. At first I hated it because my whole life I have painted from photos. Very representational. Detailed. Photo realistic. I cant lie…really good. BUT this kind of work only could make me so happy. I felt like something was missing. I felt like ME was missing in my work. It was not that I hated non representational work, I just did not understand it. It was that I relied so heavily on my technical ability to produce what I, and all others around me was “good art”. My teacher told me a was a painter for non-painters. I did not realize the beauty of paint and the process. Then I had a break thru painting. It started out from a photo of sunglasses underwater but weeks, tons of scraping off and adding paint, and 70+ later evolved to be a 360 degree turn into my first non representational abstract painting. …. getting to the article I read above…I use to feel that just anyone could do an abstract painting. I probally would have said the chimp comment. but now I totally disagree. it takes a special skill. You have to see and know what works elementally with color shape line..all of that and more. I think that the artist does not need to to tell anyone about the meaning or feelings…it will be easily seen in the work if it is there. My teacher said that with abstract art…not everyone that walks into the room and sees the painting will understand the value of it. It takes a special eye. The eye of a painter.
Much representational art is also just wallpaper. Some painters will just produce representational art of popular subjects because it will sell. there is no soul in these paintings, whilst good non-representational art should express the feelings of the artist who has put his all into the painting.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
In the end “all art is abstract; all art is expression.”
All art is representational, even if that representation is merely the representation of the artist’s idea of the abstract, or of the viewer’s state of observation.
I think Picasso’s comment is applicable here. It goes something like this: “All art is a lie that allows us to see the truth.” Even realism is a “lie”, in the sense that it’s just paint on canvas (or whatever the medium may be). And because the artist is always bringing his or her unique vision to the subject portrayed, simply by the choices made in the work’s execution. Those unique choices are what show a special truth to the viewer.
Picasso also felt that if he wanted to paint realistically, it would be just as easy to use words to describe the subject matter than to paint it. He chose abstraction because, for him, he was able to “say” more than what realism could convey.
Artists, partial to abstract or non-objective approaches, are using the same vocabulary of elements and principles of design as do artists who prefer a representational approach; the language is the same, regardless.
It seems to me every artist’s vision, portrayed in whatever manner and if done relatively successfully, brings something new to my understanding of the world and life experiences. I don’t have to love it, or even like it, but I can still appreciate it. Being challenged by the artist is part of the experience; I’ll take it any way it comes!
Lynn
“Sure, I can paint like Norman Rockwell if I want to”
Ok. Show me
Andrew.
This is not a place where I could teach you to see. If I could, you would understand the truth in representational art. The non truth in abstract non representational ast is there in your face, if you have eyes. You say ‘Educate yourself’. I am a 63 year old artist who has been in abstraction, then in surrealism, and now in realism. See my work on the web. Just look for Ricardo Carbajal Moss. I am edutated. It is people like you who read the art books of today and become a consumer of the abstract world of art. To abstract a reality as Picaso dis is art. To splash paint on a canvas as Jacson did is child play. A mind that sees and shows a world of order is agreat mind. A person who just loves paint on a canvas that is without representation is just a consumer of the lie American art deallers, colectors, and art writers have shoved down the mind of the Joe publick. It is you, I am afraid, who should pick up a book and get some real education.
Saludos
Ricardo,
I didn’t mean to be so blunt in my previous comment but I’m afraid I still disagree with you. I am attending graduate school at the Glasgow School of Art. I guess I’m getting a “real education”. Or maybe I should try reading an art book from your generation. I’m afraid to say, but time may have passed you by. To say that non representational art is child’s play is very ignorant. You can’t just ignore all the wonderful painters of this genre that are from all over the world (not just America). You are trying to tell me that every one of the art museums I’ve been to in Europe and the US are lying to us?? You know, I had a painting teacher who was about your age tell me the same thing about non representational painting. Maybe he was bitter too because he got no recognition at the time. Ironic thing is, he is painting cherries now too!! I am a “non representational” painter, or what ever you want to call me. I take some offense, although used to the accusations you make about “.. the lie of American art dealers, collectors, etc… etc…” It’s funny to essentially be called a sellout by someone who paints fruits, uses gold leaf, and previously ripped Dali’s techniques. Sorry to be rude again, but you need to let it go. Art is in a new age. Painters are doing all kinds of wild things. What if an artist wants to splash some paint around and finds something unique to them in the process. Then, is able to articulate to viewers why its brilliant, then so be it. That’s the beauty of art. Non representational art can be universal and doesn’t serve any political agendas. It is the result of the human imagination and not a trained technique of copying what you see. The whole realism vs. non realism debate is something of the past. People just need to accept it and move on.
PS… Picasso was a business man.
Andrew Ina. You still do not see. You might get it i 10 years or so. The world will be there for you when you do see the light. This is what art is. Light coming off of the things we see. Light from the inside is just ########. Be prepared to see. You might do so before you become too old to paint. When you do see, email me.
Ricardo….why are you so angry with Andrew for seeing art differently than you?
“To splash paint on a canvas as Jackson did is child play. “
- Actually Ricardo, Jackson’s art is based on fractal designs, far from childs play.
“A mind that sees and shows a world of order is a great mind.”
- Is this your opinion or a quote from WWII?
Tom. Children can and do paint. Should we think that the art children do can be thought of as great art? Should it be sold for millions of dollars? Jackson did not feel so good about his art at the end of his life. He wanted to go back to painting reality. The galleries would not take the art that he did at the end. So he drank knowing that he was a product of the art world and that the ‘art’ he sold was not what he loved. Andrew reminds me of my younger years when I thought that only the nonrepresentational art was art. Do you paint Tom? If so where can I see your art. ‘Art without measurment is not art’. Perhaps you know who said this. Do you? I am not angry with anyone. I know what the art world is and I also know that the representational artists of today are in a battle with the powers that rule the art world. In time we will see that the nonrepresentational abstract work created by people who can’t draw or paint will be thought of as what it is. Child’s play
Tom,fractal designs’ Tell me. Did Jackson know about fractual design? Do you know where Jackson got the idea to drip? I hope you are not a teacher of art. Jackson never touched a computer and no his ‘art’ is not conected in any way to your fractual design. People out there, get real. The world is not a place that you can spin to your egomania.