 |
|
|
I am an expert when it comes to looking at abstract art. I could offer my Bachelor and Master degrees as credentials and also point out that I’ve been looking at abstract art, seriously looking, for over 20 years. Or I could add that I’ve been making art for around 40 years. But my real expertise is derived from writing about art for the past 4+ years which adds a whole other dimension to my viewing. Idly looking at art and making pat observations is one thing (even among artists). Writing reviews and profiles about the same is quite something else. Although I claim to be an expert whether I am a good or bad expert is a matter of opinion. How should you look at an abstract painting? The first and most important thing is to dump a lot of suppressive baggage starting with that word “should” and the whole ridiculous notion that a work of art is supposed to “look like something”. There is nothing at all wrong with representation, depiction, narration or figuration which has, after all, long been a part of art history. But the dirty little secret is that they are no more necessary to art then lyrics are to understanding music. In fact, over the past 100 years or so they have not even been key ingredients whether you define art as abstract or not. So, while art may look like something recognizable it may just as well not. Next, throw out the notion that you are too stupid to understand abstract art. If you believe that you can understand figurative art why should you think you can’t understand non-figurative art? On the other hand, no great art, figurative or abstract, reveals itself without some effort on the part of the viewer. Anything truly worth knowing requires spending a considerable amount of time to understand it. This proves particularly difficult given the immediate gratification that permeates our contemporary society. As with food the same is true of art: the more immediate and sugar coated the less nourishing, empty and ultimately un-gratifying it is. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While especially true of popular culture, recent trends in art have yielded such curiously similar, albeit polar opposites as Jeff Koons and the equally vacuous, ersatz “painter of light”, Thomas Kincade. Finally, forget about fame. Many great artists are famous but many, many more are not. Fame is a whole other entity unto itself that has more to do with any given culture’s taste rather than profound ideas about art. With the rock star status accorded some of the original proponents of the New York School this has been a problem in the art world ever since. Fame is worse then useless because it serves as a powerful distraction to individual thinking. Now that you have emptied your mind of such notions, empty it even further. Try to forget about your preconceptions and value judgments about what art is or should be. Try to do the impossible and achieve a pre-academic state of mind. Try to remember what it was like to see the world like a young child before anyone was able to explain it in words. The closer you can get to this point the better chance you have but I’ll warn you, it’s not easy. Actually, the more formal and advanced your art education the harder it is to achieve (take this from someone who has actively been trying to get there for over 20 years). So, maybe now you are ready to begin looking at abstract art such as is found on these pages or in galleries and museums. From this point on it is a matter of simply doing a lot of looking at the art; but looking without evaluating, looking without reading or listening to descriptions, opinions and criticism of what you are supposed to see. Ask yourself how you react to a work of abstract art. How do you feel about it? By the way, this doesn’t necessarily mean that art should always make you feel good. After all, some great art explores the darker emotions such as revulsion, sadness or horror. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
