Цитата:
Сообщение от LCR
perception of the inner life of paintings (emphasis mine), not trying to give a picture directly affect themselves. His spiritual sight, blinded by external means, not looking that lives with the help of these funds.
|
Цитата:
Сообщение от LCR
Do you see how interesting? Just compare this understanding of the yellow /blue /red with the symbol of Mark in which they symbolized, respectively, a) femininity, gentleness, etc., b) the masculine, the severity and spirituality, and c) red - the color of violence to realize that the total Theoretically platform they had not.
Of course, not all artists feel the need to clothe their aesthetics in theoretical form. But nobody will convince me that those who do, write their works in accordance with developed their theoretical platform. On the contrary, I am sure that this theoretical platform invented by them to justify the legality of his vision and thus adopt the quality of work.
|
LCR, thanks for the quote. I think they just confirm what I wrote. The generality of aesthetic and ideological platform is not determined by what color that symbolizes, and shared their relation to color as the "essence" that is visible
spiritual eyes. "Spiritual Vision" - this is quite anthroposophical category.
But, thank God, the art has never been a "handmaiden of philosophy and even religion. But agree that a certain view of the world is always present in any art "text" (excuse the structuralist term). As in the Gothic cathedral, and in Watteau painting.
But I think that Kandinsky gave the world its forms more than Steiner and anthroposophy. While adherents, of course, believe that this is only an illustration of learning.
(Boyus. that tag nabegut anthroposophy, as has recently been so rounded off). And in general - is not art criticism site
.