Webster defines abstract as: a.considered apart from a specific instance, b.expressing a quality apart from the object or c. having only intrinsic form with minimum pictorial representation. Quite simply; taking an object and concentrating on its core fundamentalness. All three definitions very easily fit abstract painting in showing, telling, drawing and painting the very essence of the object without actually depicting the object itself.
How does an abstract painter arrive at an abstract design? Many stated that they started with a representational motif, that the motif was something readily identifiable. They dissected the motif as they say, trying to find the bare bones, the very essence of the object. They expressed this essence with colorful shapes, some beautiful, some drab, and some just plain ugly.
In almost any painting the artist is building a statement. It’s easy to say pretty pink flowers in a representational painting. What the abstract artist has to say should be said with his/her simple means; brush marks, color and interesting shapes. Also, since color is arbitrary, color are at the artist’s whim, and may or may possibly not be pretty and has nothing related to the painting’s success https://joomlamarketingtips.com/large-abstract-paintings-painting-for-beginners/.
To make a meaningful statement with out a recognizable subject is daunting. It’s not really a matter of simply looking and drawing. She or he must use all their wiles to activate us in dialog with their art, being limited, or we ought to say, unlimited, with unrecognizable shapes and unrelated (to the object) color. The artist must interest and speak to the viewer through form and color.
A weak, wishy washy, pretty pink flower painting says, “Weak, wishy washy pretty pink flowers!” Bright, bold colors, without form and substance in an abstract painting says, “No form and no substance!” Neither painting is successful.
So….. here we stand in front of the artwork, having no understanding of abstract art, its purpose and intention. We would like to respond but we’re with out a clue. So, we hesitate in front of the art work, we don’t know very well what to say, we don’t answer the colour or design, so, we walk away saying, or at the least thinking, “That artist should be nuts!” And wondering what the painting was all about. What was its purpose? Was it good art or not?
There are a few people who are of the opinion that a painting should be representational to be good art. And if they can’t see every hair on the head and every leaf on the tree, then the art is not good. That simply is not true. You could prefer the see every hair but that’s definitely not an indication of good art.
What guidelines do we have in judging abstract paintings merits? The guidelines that representational painters must follow are the same for the abstract painter. The job must have readable values, color harmony and dominance, repetition with variety in shapes, colors and lines, all that pertains to good art should also maintain abstract art.
An accumulation of wild colors and shapes does not always total up to good art in abstraction or representational art. A great abstract may be harder to pull off than representational art because the artist is depending on his imagination and intuition to make something meaningful and of value. (not necessarily monetary value)
In trying to understand abstract (non-representational) art, approach it with the theory in your mind to simply appreciate what’s before you. Sometimes the title will give us an idea as to what the painting is about. That helps. Then look and take note of how it affects you.
Does the colour speak for your requirements? Are you lifted up or cast down by the colour? You can have some reaction to an item of art work, it will move you for some reason, perhaps not much, perhaps a great deal. Identify what it is. Good art, whether abstract or representational, sets a mood, tells a tale, however subtle, intrigues and interests the viewer, and therefore, each painting should be appreciated by itself merits.