Цитата:
Сообщение от artcol
Art de facto - an ideological construct, ie entirely in keeping with the prevailing paradigm. And only occasionally
Quote:
Product, it is his creator, his voice, his I
To achieve this it is very difficult. Society, State of, etc. pressed his weight.
And there is another art form (an ideological-conditioned, individually subjective) - the objective. Formless material world, rising higher forms of life etc. The program's creators of abstract art was just theosophical. Silver Age.
|
artcol, Are you serious about less ideological conditionality "objective art" of Gurdjieff (which you cite below
Цитата:
|
Сообщение от artcol; 1527601"
the definition of objective art:
|
)?
If the reduction of art to the service functions - not the apotheosis of pure ideology, what is it then? Hood. ideal of George Ivanovitch - sphinx and statues of deities, postrennye on esoteric scheme, and so that this scheme is to "read" the book is dedicated. All random, personal, "unconscious" of the paintings and sculptures should be expelled. What do you mean "I vote", which searches for the artist, when everything has already been found and only a subjective hindrance. And as art, distorts the shape or pointless - it is not art. Analogies with the cultural line in the USSR and the Third Reich did not occur?
When the "dominant paradigm", diffusely poured into the public consciousness, the "marginal" artists have a chance to shake her, and eventually transform it. But when, God forbid, "objective" paradigm coined in a totalitarian concept - the art of Khan.
Theosophy - is not top of the spiritual development of mankind and not all qualify for such a golden age of abstraction. (Crisis Theosophy graphically represented figure Krishnamurti, whom Theosophists believed enlightened they are prepared for the role of the icon of Theosophy, and who, having reached maturity, he sent them away.)
The creators of abstract art and its branches were set up in most mystical, but not all theosophical; program they were different - some inspired by Theosophy, the other having no relationship to.
Цитата:
|
Сообщение от Tiutchev; 1529763"
Art-lover, this work can not be considered "a masterpiece of abstract painting." Not in the sense that it can not be a masterpiece, but that can not be abstract. You posted an excerpt should, rather, to open an anthology devoted to Impressionism, but no it does not abstract art. Pay attention to selected parts of my text. This question is fundamental for the understanding of abstract art
|
Цитата:
|
Сообщение от Maroussia; 1530281"
Art-lover, I also have a question for you: if you call the date of the first abstract work in 1832 (which, moreover, has not survived), does this mean that between 1830 and Mi 1910-mi over the years nobody has created any other abstract work?
|
Tyutchev Maroussia, the post of "The unknown masterpiece" - a joke. Take it easy - do not judge her too harshly
So if you dig, the Balzacian his study examined the gap between the artist's intent and objective outcome of his efforts, as well as the issues raised in the transcendence of art (in conjunction with the tasks of translating the absolute), and depending on perception of cognitive systems. ) Jokes, jokes, and these issues are cross-cutting for the abstract movements of the 20 th century.
The other questions I will answer later. I apologize - not physically have time.