Wordless Wednesday – Abstract Yes, But Is it Art?

DSC_1074

Thanks for looking 🙂

Advertisements

About Norm 2.0

World’s youngest grumpy old man & heart failure wonder boy. Interests: writing, woodworking, photography, travel, tennis, wine, and I know a bit about power tools.
Image | This entry was posted in Photography, Wordless Wednesday and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Wordless Wednesday – Abstract Yes, But Is it Art?

  1. dimlamp says:

    I’m old-fashioned, I prefer representational art, (although I don’t mind abstract art if there actually is something representational in it that I can figure out) this to me is not art, and I wonder if this piece of non-art was the one purchased by our Canadian government some years ago? I remember something about that in the news back then, if so, then in my humble opinion, it was a colossal waste of taxpayer’s hard earned money.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Norm 2.0 says:

      It is indeed the piece you’re thinking of. It was purchased (and is still owned) by the National Gallery for 1.5 million – it’s reported to be worth 40 million today! Go figure eh?

      Like

  2. Prior-01 says:

    cool photo and I really enjoyed the comments here Norm! such fun post.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. reocochran says:

    I like modern art which has some kind of symbolism found in it. This doesn’t look like anything but a banner or flag hung “wrong.”
    My brother is an artist and when the Impresionist’s painted, he explained l to me, there are subjects given “impressions” of. . . 🙂
    This one NOT so much.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Jade Sutton says:

    I’m not a fan of modern art. I went to Tate Modern in London and I left totally confused. I was really trying to figure out how what I had just seen was art. Fortunately, everyone is different and we can celebrate those differences even if we don’t understand them. Awesome post!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Norm 2.0 says:

      Thanks Jade. I think your comment sums it up quite succinctly.
      There was a kind lady at the gallery who explained to me that because of the size and scale of this piece (18 feet tall) it is meant to be viewed up close. You’re supposed to stare blankly into the red until your brain starts playing tricks and it starts flickering or rippling around the edges like fire.
      I stood there for almost 10 minutes – it never happened for me 😦

      Liked by 3 people

  5. Cee Neuner says:

    Judy said it politically correct. No it is not art…Okay I’m not politically correct. 😀

    Liked by 1 person

    • Norm 2.0 says:

      Well then it’s a piece of “not art” that most art experts estimate is worth $40 million.
      Don’t worry, I don’t understand it either. But it sure makes for interesting discussions 🙂

      Like

  6. spanishwoods says:

    Art is so completely subjective, isn’t it? I always find it fascinating when people say, “I could do that myself”. And I think, ok, then do it. And they do not. Because most of the time the actual “vision” or “inspiration” is the seed of “art”. It’s very easy to be negative and dismissive. Much, much harder to keep quite and simply create.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. GeorgieMoon says:

    To me, art requires a degree of skill or proficiency and also needs you to go “wow, that’s awesome” when you look at it. These pieces? I think not…..
    I was at a similar art gallery last week, did you see my post? https://georgiemoon2016.wordpress.com/2016/04/18/modern-art-do-you-love-it-or-hate-it/

    Liked by 2 people

  8. sue says:

    Actually I think I like the floor.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. I love the man caught in a “sculpture” as a shish kebab – you captured a moment LOL. That is art but the painting isn’t.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. “Art” is in the eye of the beholder. My eye sees three rectangles of two colors. But, that is why art museums of full of different types of paintings – something for everyone. 🙂

    Liked by 3 people

    • Norm 2.0 says:

      I try to keep an open mind and say to myself that maybe I just don’t get it. The National Gallery paid 1.5 million for this in the 70’s and now have it insured for over 40 million. And so I say again: I just don’t get it, but obviously some others do 😀

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s