Interesting. Since I'm not even sure I see through a monitor.For instance a painting, especially an abstract is likewise an image but I wouldn't say I see through the painting to the scene that was painted.
Is an abstract painting (like a Pollock) an image?
A true image?
Paul Stilwell writes : "Is an abstract painting (like a Pollock) an image?"No. An abstract is an abstraction of the material to the immaterial. Same as we abstract catness from observing cats. Where as Pollack is nothing more than splattered paint pretending to be an abstraction.Pollack has as much to do with abstraction as shovels grating on concrete have to do with melody. Only fools mistake the one for the other.
adding on. Every artistic rendering is an abstraction by nature because that is what artists do.
To add a counterpoint: Pollack is all technique and no subject, a perpetual étude with no essai. It is reportedly quite difficult to apply paint to canvas in a manner that is convincingly Pollackian --- so, whether he makes anything worth looking at or not, he has a definite style, and shows considerable skill. It's just that, with all that skill he hasn't done much of anything; his language is opaque and has founded no tradition.
Post a Comment