Abstract forever

[Маруся]

Art-lover, I also have a question for you: if you call the date of the first abstract work in 1832 (which, to the WMD did not survived), does this mean that between 1830 and 1910 mi-mi for years no one has created a single another abstract work?

Then how about Kandinsky and abstract art theorist Michel Seyform, who argues that it all started with Kandinsky: "the artist entered the darkened shop and saw indescribable beauty, which was his own picture, seen through different eyes. From this point on Kandinsky has gained complete freedom from imitation. Kandinsky passed cubism - rarely the case. Freedom of lines, colorful symphony of his works was inspired by Russian folklore, which Kandinsky and his contemporaries as Larionov and Malevich, are well known and studied. "

And then, in addition to Kandinsky, to speak about Rayonism Larionov and Malevich's Suprematism?

[Art-lover]

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

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.

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

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.

[fabosch]

Сообщение от DSF

Contemporaries also very skeptical of Leonardo as an artist, because in those days, the balance in the painting is clearly leaning toward colors and Leonardo knocked out of the total number.

Adoption is very controversial. According to Bernson, Florentine School vsegdv tended to develop problems drawing, perspective, composition at the expense of coloristic developments. In this sense, Leonardo was her true son, and nowhere is not distracting.
Kloristicheskie delights were the prerogative of the Venetian school.

Сообщение от DSF

"Black Square" - an example of an extreme point of priority of color.

And this statement somehow does not seem convincing. Probably too extreme point of priority of color should be called, for example, Klein, Rothko or his famous blue. And as a black square, as I wrote above, it seems to me the product, primarily conceptual, enshrining minority of concepts such as composition, color, texture, metal, plastic, this is largely an artistic gesture (like Duchamp urinals) than the support of color or plastic values.

Сообщение от DSF

All the space of painting lies between these extremes, as is said, to "slide rule". Each artist chooses his place on the closed interval. In this regard, the abstractionist painter does not differ from the artist's classicist, gently issuing the sepia fingers at the foot of Jupiter. They just have different priorities, but they are both in the space of painting. "So, for example, works by Rembrandt will be fine in a different way than the paintings of Raphael or Leonardo da Vinci. And almost impossible to say that the product of one higher than another, for example, self-portrait by Rembrandt in the fez beautiful a portrait of Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa, or his. "
Harmonious combination of form and color, in my opinion, the biggest challenge for the artist. It is only by great talent. Our century - the century of the weak, so we have to choose what to "kill" - the shape or color to make your life easier. Most choose the "death" form, it is easier, no need to spend years training.

From this thesis, I somehow implicitly read in what you think is the abstraction of being on pole, in color and realistic painting - on the pole shape. Is that so?

Posted 7 minutes

Сообщение от Stanislavski

Abstraction (in the extreme, the absolute, the totality of its form) as opposed to other "methods" do not shows, but only and exclusively is deep, unconscious intention of the human person. This is evidenced by Pollock: An artist from the "creator" voluntarily turns it into a weapon of unknown elements, giving themselves to their will in the name of "breakthrough" in reality, standing outside world, comprehended by our senses. Abstraction is "to do", a stylized, focused on our cultural paradigm that looks like a secondary and artificial.

Thesis, of course, spectacular, but not undisputed, if I understand you correctly (why am I so blunt, for the umpteenth time I can not overpower the depth of your calculations? ).
What do you mean by "make" an abstraction you know? Such as Kandinsky bauhauzovskogo period, Mondrian, huh?

Сообщение от Stanislavski

And the last. On the criteria. Total abstraction which annihilates whatever principles of interpretation, which means that all interpretations take on the same ontological status, that is, each of which will be valid and no less important than the interpretation of the artist.

 Well this is just almost a solipsism

Posted 11 minutes

Сообщение от Stanislavski

"harmonization" and "laws of composition, rhythm and cromatics" as you put it, happens in our head, not on the canvas. This is our interpretation, and this also is a great projective role of abstraction as a tool for our understanding of ourselves as individuals, as a species and as an idea.

True, it's true written Peter is not only a spectator, but also in the head, muscles, nerves, and where there still any good artist. Some have "on the machine, almost unconsciously, others do it by trial and error, others still somehow, etc.

[iside]

Сообщение от Peter

Yes, there are criteria for evaluation of abstract painting and they are not many otltchayutsya on the criteria of realistic painting. If a child draws abracadabra, it is her, and will remain, and no one would never call it "creation" abstract art. A professional artist, even in the abstract will solve the problem really is quite realistic if we are talking about a picture. Firstly it will be the layout, that is the location on the sheet.

I have quoted Peter a, but the issue would like to ask all participants.
Ie if indeed there are criteria for evaluation of abstract painting, then everything becomes very simple.
For example, if I, as a man who owns these criteria, which is attached here or a job or even a series of works by one artist, without specifying its name, then I can get a professional opinion, how much good work and whether they were work of genius or a scribble from someone who decided to become an artist?
Because I have a suspicion that the opinions will differ, and even very likely that will not coincide with the opinions of eminent critics.

Why am I all that? I really like to read theoretical arguments about abstraction, but I've said many times to persuade and not by the example of abstract paintings that every man has his opinion, especially when it comes to fresh pictures and new names, but not even very new.

[fabosch]

Сообщение от iside

I have quoted Peter a, but the issue would like to ask all participants.
Ie if indeed there are criteria for evaluation of abstract painting, then everything becomes very simple.

All will be very simple, if you do the very difficult conditions - to teach these criteria. And it's not simply because they do not always and not all are formalized, but also because learning it can serve as a foundation for learning, personal experience, without which formal methods are dead.

Сообщение от iside

For example, if I, as someone who has not mastered these criteria, which is attached here or a job or even a series of works by one artist, without specifying its name, then I can get a professional opinion, how much good work and whether they work of genius or a scribble, from someone who decided to become an artist?
Because I have a suspicion that the opinions will differ, and even very likely that will not coincide with the opinions of eminent critics.

Even if you collect a sufficient number of "eminent critics," and then vypoluchite discordance, but still, I think a trend is noticeable. And at the forum, you think all ravnoimenity and all are equally owned by the criteria? Forums - it's quite a motley community, although, of course, higher level than simple random sampling.

Сообщение от iside

Why am I all that? I really like to read theoretical arguments about abstraction, but I've said many times to persuade and not by the example of abstract paintings that every man has his opinion, especially when it comes to fresh pictures and new names, but not even very new.

That's exactly

[iside]

Сообщение от fabosch; 1530471"

Even if you collect a sufficient number of "eminent critics," and then vypoluchite discordance, but still, I think a trend is noticeable.

fabosch, not the fact that the trend will be noticeable. Different critics and specialize in different just because of personal tastes, ie, Of course they know the story of the same, namely to work kontemporarnyh someone reviews only video art, one painting in one or another style, etc. I know this from experience, unfortunately, life and work, this fact does not simplify.

Сообщение от fabosch

forum - it's quite a motley community, although, of course, and higher level than just a random sample

I agree, although this impression tends to be scattered at a closer look at some of the participants. Nevertheless, the conversations that take place here, the depth and quality of the arguments I have never met in an English speaking area, which has long been all write only for money.

Gentlemen, we have finally left? Study, study and study again, but in the end the art before us or not, everyone decides for himself. How to say LCR: is not art, because I said so or is a genius because I said so , sorry for the fact that do not have the exact phrase.

[Станиславский]

Сообщение от fabosch

What do you mean by "make" an abstraction you know? Such as Kandinsky bauhauzovskogo period, Mondrian, yes?

Explain. There is populyapnaya "abstraktsionistskaya" branch under the graceful name of "plein air for the abstract" (http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showthread.php?t=106821). So, there is an attempt to create svogo roda forge layered abstract, which means "abstractive series" (it should be the same!) Come to the same "correct" result in the creation of abstraction. If we leave aside the undoubted commercial merits of the project, as well as many undeniably talented works, then the net balance is obtained by naked simulyakr such technology is currently sculpting abstract paintings. Then let zaprogrammiruem computer to create a "series of abstracts," and he displays a sterile formula for creating an abstraction without any "plein air". Of course, this example is extreme, but it is very telling in terms of how you can "make" an abstraction, emptied of its main element - an attempt to direct and unmediated expression on the canvas is not measurable protorealnosti unconscious.

[kr555]

Сообщение от iside

For example, if I, as someone who has not mastered these criteria, which is attached here or a job or even a series of works by one artist, without specifying its name, then I can get a professional opinion, how good the work is Do they work of genius or a scribble, from someone who decided to become an artist?
Because I have a suspicion that the opinions will differ, and even very likely that will not coincide with the opinions of eminent critics.

Well, and why it causes such a doubt?
Here for example mesh work, and absolutely can not imagine that someone could call it "normal and oil, from someone who decided to become an artist." Even my venerable years and is very conservative father, who admits only to the Wanderers and the Jack of Diamonds is considered normal and dry, recognizes that this is a very high level of painting, though she does not like him at all.

[fabosch]

Сообщение от Stanislavsky

attribute. There is populyapnaya "abstraktsionistskaya" branch under the graceful name of "plein air for the abstract" (http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showthread.php?t=106821). So, there is an attempt to create a kind svogo forge layered abstract, which means "abstractive series" (it should be the same!) Come to the same "correct" result in the creation of abstraction. If we leave aside the undoubted commercial merits of the project, as well as many undeniably talented works, then the net balance is obtained by naked simulyakr such technology is currently sculpting abstract paintings. Then let zaprogrammiruem computer to create a "series of abstracts," and he displays a sterile formula for creating an abstraction without any "plein air". Of course, this example is extreme, but it is very telling in terms of how you can "make" an abstraction, emptied of its main element - an attempt to direct and unmediated expression on the canvas is not measurable unconscious protorealnosti.

God knows, I do not understand how "an attempt to direct and unmediated expression on the canvas is not measurable unconscious protorealnosti" depends on whether the artist was standing in front of this open air? You want to say that anyone who reaches the "direct and unmediated expression on the canvas is not measurable protorealnosti unconscious, does not live on earth, closes his eyes before and during work, and empties into nirvana? I think you are a prisoner of beautiful words. Of course a lot of artists, all different, all have different ways of working. There are those who are in the process of work feels like a medium. But here again we find ourselves in a nice trap. Do you think gets (sorry, I have to repeat part of his address Tiutchev), we can judge whether the work of "abstraction", unless we know that the artist when it was created have been in contact with no measurable unconscious protorealnosti? do not be offended, but I think you too much to burden. By virtue of whether it is man?
But seriously, it seems to me that you're really narrow down the scope of what is meant by abstract art. Although, of course, in this region there are ranges that are closer to what you're talking about

[DSF]

Сообщение от fabosch

From this thesis, I somehow implicitly read in what you think is the abstraction of being on pole, in color and realistic painting - on the pole shape. This is so?

So.

Сообщение от fabosch

According to Bernson, Florentine School vsegdv tended to develop problems drawing, perspective, composition at the expense of development ... Kloristicheskie coloristic delights were the prerogative of the Venetian school.

Yes, you are right in art history is a point of view. It is not entirely true, in my view pure practice. Giotto - pure colorist, Taddeo Gaddi - surprisingly harmonious, and Masaccio, Botticelli, Lippi, Fra Angelico ... I still can not forget those of harmony, where everything is subordinated to bloom. Yes, they worked on a drawing, perspective, composition. But all of this - not at the expense of color, and it is amazing! How they managed to combine everything into a coherent whole? It is very difficult. Venetian school more inclined to form, whatever the historians wrote.

Сообщение от fabosch

Probably too extreme point of priority of color should be called, for example, Klein, Rothko or his famous blue.

Let me explain. Black square - is one tsvetoforma. One simple shape - square, and one color - black (conventionally black, it is rather dark gray). Just as, for example, the red dot - it will also be a simple tsvetoforma. Rothko, still, uses several tsvetoform on canvas. Therefore, his work, I can not say very much at the point, although very close to it. But Klein - yes, I agree.

About abstract art written many texts. This is due to the fact that people still want to understand and realize what they are seeing. But what can you write about a certain combination of color spots? Only one - the mystic, the unconscious, the deep intention, etc. Initially, the artists are not very pleasant, but he threw good "bone", they were told - you're visionaries, mediums, the researchers of the new realities, innovators and geniuses. And the artists included in this game. Since then, as Renoir said: ".. Artists see themselves as exceptional beings, imagine that, putting the blue paint instead of black, they change the world. " Time will pass, will come new generation of artists, will replace the blue paint in black and once again "turn the world."

Сообщение от iside

... I can get a professional opinion, how much good work and whether they were work of genius or a scribble, from someone who decided to become an artist?

Thank you for your kind words, dear iside! "I write here often, because I have really very little free time.
Responding to your question is - can not. Painting, based on a harmony of color, very difficult, almost impossible to evaluate the monitor, we can not see the "quality" of the original color and its scale. You need to look original. On the internet you can more or less to evaluate only the form of: proportions, angles, volumes, etc. All this is a totally objective criteria. With color - more difficult.