On Abstract Art...
I visited an art exhibition on the 28th October. The artwork was varied in skill and ability. The ones I was the most interested in were poor attempts at 'abstract' art. The reason for my interest is that it answers a question I have been trying to answer - what is abstract art, and what it isn't.
Abstract art is when you purposefully abstract information from source and develop it into a finished piece in itself. The finished piece may not appear to represent anything, however it exists because of the source inspiration it was abstracted from.
It doesn't work when media is "expressively" applied to a canvas without purpose. Even abstract expressionism has a source - and set of rules/methods which structure and organise the process to record meaning.
Randomly applying media with no purpose is not art. And this is obvious when you look at this work. There is something about the mark making that is subconsciously transmitted to the viewer which is read as "purposeful".
I also observed the importance of quality framing of a finished artwork - a good piece can b horribly let down by a poor frame or contextual setting.
