Is art about invention and imagination or about beauty? How does one analyze a painting. Is an artist escaping thinking when she paints abstract, where most of the times thinking is non-existent. Isn’t then art all about transporting the viewer into a different world, more into the artist’s world?
When abstract was actually thought upon, then wouldn’t that be one of the finest things a viewer can expect? If the artist can really portray what she feels, which has to do more with imagination than what she sees, and if she were able to do that with bare minimum strokes, then I would call that art.
Great artist like Picasso invented Cubism, a facet, where he represented 3 dimensions and sometimes even 4 dimensions in the same painting. Art as an invention there.
Vincent Van Gogh chose to reflect art as a technique rather than as a subject or a theme.
Or artists like Escher whose paintings were a reflection of visual mathematics, and representation of infinity.
What do they have in common; they all were innovative and intelligent in their art. A painting, which would wring one’s thought, which doesn’t, allows itself to be rejected as just another fine-looking painting.
We come back to the same question again, like any other profession, art is all about its uniqueness. It has be about innovation, style or intelligence. I can find beauty in every nook and corner, but where do I find this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment