Sunday, 19 October 2014

What does it all mean??

Over the past few weeks I have been trying to gather my thoughts on the term 'abstract' and how it is applied to art in general and to photography in particular. It has been a journey that has been both frustrating and less than enlightening. The lasting impression is that there is no generally accepted definition of the term and virtually all attempts to proffer a definition are written in such broad terms as to be meaningless. For example the definition offered by the Tate gallery reads:

"Artworks that do not attempt to represent a recognisable reality but instead uses shapes, colours, forms and textures to achieve their effect."

All non-language art uses shapes, colours, forms and textures in some combination because that is the only way to communicate with the audience so that the key to the definition lies in the explanation that abstract artworks - do not attempt to represent a recognisable reality. The question that remains unanswered is what is it that the artwork does represent. It presumably represents something (it is difficult to imagine a representation of nothing) even if the interpretation we place upon the work does not match the intent of the artist. A recognisable reality has been created by the very act of the existence of the piece of work. In describing work of Mondrian and its development over time reference can only be made to the real world (for example see pages 51 -55 of Moszynska A (1990) Abstract Art  London: Thames & Hudson) because the description has to be in a language that is understood by the reader. That language is of and determined by the world in which we live and has no reference outside of that world.

What was most noticeable in my researches was the number of attempts by different artists and group of artists to create the 'true' abstract or perhaps more accurately the 'pure' abstract. Arising from dissatisfaction with the abstract work of the time the pattern seems to be:-  a determination to break away from the dominant works by a group of artists; the publication of a manifesto setting out the new 'truth'; a relatively short period of activity before dissatisfaction within the group or its disciples leads to a fracturing and a fresh attempt to reveal a newer truth. The cycle then repeats. To the outsider this suggests that there is no one answer to the question - What is an abstract work of art? other than it is an abstract because that is what the artist attempted to produce.

No comments:

Post a Comment