This one was a well crafted crescendo... to the v e r y l a s t sentence. Bravo!

The term 'abstract ' is usually used to describe a painting which should actually be referred to as non-objective. Unless we paint in a style that is absolutely photo-realistic, then we are painting an abstract to some degree. Non-objective refers to an image that is not recognisable.

"The answer lies in whether the artist is able to express will. Artists without the ability to express will will never know."

The question is wich kind of will is all about and I think there are more that one unswer, I don't want to be shut by any other painter, I just do it my way.

I always tell my students to think abstractly and paint realistically. Really, what is the main difference between abstraction and realism? Both utilize shape, line, mark making, texture, color, value and edge to move the eye throughout the canvas. Both rely on pattern vs rest, hard and soft, warm and cool, light against dark, rhythmic movements and the sheer beauty in paint itself to connect mind to viewer and viewer to his or her own response. I always get a kick about the rift between the two. The main difference is that one movement uses recognizable icons and the other uses more psychological elements in the process. Can't we all just get along?

I remember (years ago) beginning my B.F.A as a realistic portrait painter... after 4 years of playing snakes & ladders with outward vs. inward vision, I came out of the institutional wormhole as an abstract mixed media artist. :) :) :)

I think it was the 'happy mistakes' that broke through the mind barrier of 'what is' to 'what could be'. Texture suddenly became metaphor and scale, once serious, became a playground. Abstract art is an invitation of abandon. It breathes a wider expanse of interpretations between the artist and viewer. Each interpretation becomes its own springboard of inspiration.

How does an abstract artist become better? When they put down their tools, surveying a piece finally finished... and already crave to create what is moving anew in front of their eyes. It is perpetually striving to attain into form the leading edge of who they are.

Will I? Or won't I? Being an abstractionist and a fiber artist from the get go- childhood- I learned that realistic art embroidery was too often described as cute- one of my 2 favorite 4-letter words- the other being nice. If something I've created gets described as cute or nice- I've failed. So for me- self-learning design basics and creating my own abstract language was really the only possible pathway. I have little interest in creating representational work. At 55- after climbing out of that black hole of depression over the years- my work IS the expression of my will. So yes- I will. And recently- it paid off handsomely- not so much monetarily- but by being juried into the Colorado Art Open presently hanging at the Foothills Art Center in Golden, Colorado. 529 artists entered- they picked 98- and only a very few are fiber artists. Out of the almost 1500 art works- jurors Michael Chavez (FAC Curator) and Christoph Heinrich (Denver Art Museum Curator of Contemporary Art) selected 104- including many of the 'names' here in Colorado. What must be understood is that entering juried shows is the pathway to exposure for some of us outsider artists with no gallery connections. Regardless- I win! With my completely unique abstract art.

Is there a choice to make between creating abstract or realistic images? For me there's not, I simply can't do 'real' - it doesn't come naturally, its like rolling a snowball uphill.

I'm a Textile/Mixed Media Artist, so perhaps more abstract in that I like to use paper and stitch, fibres in the broadest sense of the term.

I've been told a few times by those who prefer realism, that my work isn't worth as much as theirs, I've not put as much effort into it, no comparison. It is true that the end result may appear simplistic or just a 'pretty' - but I can spend hours on research, investigating symbolic meanings of shapes, colours. For me it really is "a discovery of motifs that happen to be part of a painter's personal legend." I get on much better with my art work, now that I've stopped beating myself up because I naturally go to the abstract. If you want to see my work as just a pretty decoration or read into it deep and meaningful concepts, that's fine, but ultimately it's simple, I make the artwork I make, the way I see it, just the same as anyone else of any genre.

I often have students say to me that I am doing something that another painter has said is "not the way it should be done." I have little patience for other people who believe that their way is the only way and then impose their blinders on their students. That is completely inimical to creativity.

I have been painting full time for many years now. For me it is an exploration, an adventure, a discovery. As I evolve I develop my own ways of doing things that are often outside the experience of other painters. That is what makes it a discovery and that is why I keep on painting – to discover new ways of getting to a place or solving a problem. And when I teach I offer those new methods to others in the hope that my path will provide them with something that will open a door to a new adventure for them.

Great discoveries in science and exploration and the arts have always required a breaking of the rules.

I would enjoy hearing your opinion on the 'rules' of painting.

One of my favorite non-representational artists is Jack Bush. Whether viewing non-representational art or making it, I would say it is a bit like going on a mystery tour. You don't know were you're going so just enjoy the ride.

Having moved from tight realism to abstraction in the last few years, I have noticed three things: (1) viewers seem less afraid to respond, (2) I can't seem to write a statement that makes any sense, and (3) I'm having truckloads more fun.

I think you need to be abstracting something. It can be a figure or a thought or a feeling but to just make a piece for the sake of making it without it coming from somewhere, is an exercise in design.

Robert,
I always enjoy your letters and your even-handed, inquisitive, mindful approach to life and art. I am pleased that you bring up Mr. Leffel's question and give one answer for it. A more expansive answer and view about the language of visual dialog is presented in the book, "A Visual Palette--A Philosophy of the Natural Principles of Painting" by Kevin Weckbach. I would encourage all painters to read it and expand their verbal and visual vocabularies.

I love the ‘thought no thought,’ because it implies so much. It speaks of the process of trust and letting go, which all good art has in it. It also speaks of many eastern spiritual beliefs. I walk that line of wizardry and magic, because it is so vivifying! It takes me along as I allow it to.

Regarding David Leffel’s question and the answer of ‘expressing will,” it is interesting but not enough. I think it is also about building a relationship with what we cannot see and what comes through visibly that we work and play with. We learn about the way we make marks and use color and how that affects us and the visual situation we create. So it is very much about a will and a drive to know and experience the nuances and find our own visual language for them, encouraging and following leads that arise and inspire the habit of painting. It’s a healthy habit that assists us in evolving !

Bravo Larry Moore!! Thank you for the beautifully concise and clear explanation and comparison which bought some measure of clarity to my frazzled mind after reading all the previous responses. Phew!!

Robert, your essay on "abstraction" has made my week. I am a self taught painter who works in this genre with some success (i.e., people buy my paintings!) The hardest thing for me is to answer the question, "What is the meaning of this?" or "Where did this come from?" Answering, "I have no idea!" -- which is usually the truth -- sounds cavalier and callous, as if the painting had no value, which is not at all how I see it. I often joke that "we're putting our subconscious on display" and that seems to fit much of what you have said and others have commented. Thanks for making me feel much, much better about what I do!

I have also been exploring abstraction in landscapes and have sent examples of 2 paintings to illustrate this but guess they were lost. If I symplify every shape around the focal and just paint the focal with more detail the painting is stronger. Also I try to keep value shapes interesting but not too detailed the painting is stronger.

I've been teaching painting for many years and I hit on a good way to prove that all good painting is, in essence, abstract. To prove it, I show slides off-focus of great artists (abstract as well as concrete) and have the students paint it...all start with "the bones" and elaborate on what they see there that is "real"; we compare and it's hilarious to see what each has painted in response to the off focus structure of a Velasquez, Manet, Gauguin or Joan Mitchell! Fun.

Absolutely-- I was teaching a workshop to junior high schoolers and brought figurative and abstract work to show. they spent far more time "deciphering" the abstract work than the figurative.

One benefit that abstract artists have is that their works can never be critiqued as bad art - the response is that it is "not understood". Bad realist work doesn't have such escape as an option.

I will get the book The Creative Edge. May I also suggest to you a new book: "Rethinking Acrylic - Radical Solutions for Exploiting the World's Most Versatile Medium" by Patti Brady, also by North Light books. It is good, I know her and her art, and have taken some very good workshops with her.

P.S. By the way, I sing your praises in my workshops and I always have. I give my students your website. They love it. Take care.

This is one of your best! I have always tried to tell my students that ALL art is "abstract", since it is taken from something else, whether that is a bowl of fruit or inner vision. After reading the comments, I'm reassessing the tags "representational" and "non-representational". Hmm...doesn't any style of art "represent" something?

Good day, Robert!

I have a question that I would like to ask you since you have a lot of experience in the art world and meet many people who do:

I am a Vancouver based artist and I sold a large piece about 6 years ago to some one in West Vancouver. Last week I received an email from another person - also in West Vancouver - who said he owned that piece and because of financial needs wanted to sell it. He asked me if I knew of somebody who would like to buy it.

Today early morning he called me and asked the same question again. In the meantime I have tried and contacted some people who were interested in the piece years ago, but all of them weren’t able to purchase it at this moment.

Have you ever dealt with anything like this? And how do you think should I react? Does he mean I buy it back from him, you think? For how much though?

Could you please give me some advise?

Thank you so much Robert!!!
E: jeanne@axion.net
W: www.jeannekrabbendam.com

I don't understand Bill's comment that abstract art gets a special dispensation in critiquing. All art no matter the style or age is built around the universal elements of design, which we feel in our gut. . 'does it work?' applies to all art. Abstract art infact has ONLY this to go by as it loses the reference from external picture to use as a reference, making it in general more challenging. Most abstract artists I know have been good representational painters but wanted to go beyond the image, toward more interior processing. Sometimes I like to go back and forth between image and non-representation, but I assess both with same criteria.

We paint because we have an impulse to paint. We paint because the important thing is what it feels like to be painting when you are unaware of money or time or dinner. I paint anything I like abstractly or figuratively, whatever, it doesn't matter because when I'm painting I'm experiencing joy and that will resonate with somebody somewhere.