The Language of Art Part 11: Levels of Abstraction in Art

Introduction

This is the third essay on the subject of abstraction in art.  The first focused on abstraction in photography, the second on abstraction in my work, and this third essay focuses on abstraction in art. 

It can be said that, because photography is an art form, abstraction in art should have been covered in the essay on abstraction in photography.  I did not do that because I wanted to separate photography from other art mediums.  Therefore, this third essay covers not photography, which indeed is an art form, but rather painting.  Of course, it can also be said that there are many other art mediums besides painting and photography.  This is true and it opens the door for many other potential essays if I decide to continue writing about abstraction.

Indeed, the subject of abstraction in art is a rich subject.  So much so that I had to make a selection about which painters I wanted to write about in this essay.  I decided to limit my writing to only two artists, in order to keep the length of this essay reasonable and comparable to the length of my previous essay.  Here too there is material for many additional essays, should I, again, decide to continue writing about abstraction in art.

Modern Art As Point Of Reference

My point of reference for abstract work, and more specifically abstract paintings, is Modern Art. Why? Because Modern Art is the historical art period in which artistic representations were the furthest from reality.  We saw this in the essay on abstraction in photography in which I quoted parts of David Hackney’s book Secret Knowledge.  Of particular interest is Hackney’s reality versus eyeballing tradition timeline, which I am featuring again below for your convenience.  This timeline is fundamental to my discussion on abstraction. It clearly exemplifies my main point which is that the time at which the distance between reality and abstraction was the greatest is between 1870 and 1990, culminating with the modern art period from 1960-1970 roughly.

Abstraction, and by extension abstract art, is a departure from reality.  To put it bluntly, abstract art is not reality.  Abstract art does not depict reality.  In fact, abstract art does not necessarily take reality as a point of departure.  Instead, some abstract artists use ideas as their source of creativity.  Others use non visual sources of inspiration. For example, some visual artists use sounds, not necessarily sounds found in nature but sounds that they create, as inspiration for paintings. In doing so they create abstractions from abstractions, art that is an abstraction of an abstraction. Nothing is real.  Neither the art nor the source of inspiration for the art.

These concepts are inherent to my understanding of art because I grew up with abstract art. Art, for me, does not have to depict reality or use reality as a point of departure.  However, my experience is not that of everyone.  For other viewers, abstract art is a puzzle at best and an unpleasant experience at work.  My purpose here is not to convince people to like abstract art.  My purpose here is to teach what abstract art is, and more specifically in the context of this essay what abstract painting, consists of.  I believe that education is primordial in developing an understanding of abstract art.  Most people not familiar with abstract art let their opinion fall into a dualistic dichotomy: they like it or they don’t like it.  I offer a different approach, one based not on personal taste but on understanding.  Just because we do not like something does not mean we should not try to understand it.  We do not need to understand something to understand it.  For example, I do not like nuclear bombs, however I do understand how they work and what purpose they serve.  Likeness and understanding are two entirely different things.

Abstract Paintings and Reality

Abstraction is an artistic concept. What we experience every day, in our interaction with the world, is reality.  Abstraction is not present in our experience of reality.  It only exists in art.  Outside of art all we have is reality.   The purpose of abstract artists is to explore the kind of abstractions that can be created with art.  The artwork they create cannot exist in reality.  They can only exist as art. 

This is what Magritte does in the painting titled This is not a pipe.  The title, written in French on the painting, is absolutely correct.  This is not a pipe.  This is a painting of a pipe, not a real pipe. It may look like a pipe, have the color of a pipe, the shape of a pipe, but that’s it.  It cannot be used as a pipe.  It does not feel like a pipe.  It does not smell like a pipe.  It cannot be smoked like a pipe.  You cannot stuff tobacco in it, you cannot grab it or touch it.  Quite simply, you cannot use it as a pipe.  

There is also a linguistic aspect to the name of the painting.  From a linguistic standpoint, the word pipe is not related to the physical object pipe.  The relationship between word and object is arbitrary.  Nothing in the word pipe describes a pipe.  To someone who does not know what a pipe is, hearing the word pipe will not teach them what a pipe is or how to recognize a pipe.  

In sum, this painting of a pipe is not a pipe, and the word pipe is not a pipe either. The first is a work of art, a visual abstraction, and the second is an arbitrary signifier that features none of the attributes of a physical pipe.

Magritte explores the same concept in other paintings.  For example, Le Blanc Seing depicts a horseback rider in a forest. This rider is depicted alternatively behind and in front of trees. Here too, this is only possible in a painting.  Certainly, a rider seen from a fixed vantage point can be in front of trees at times and behind trees at other times.  However, that rider cannot be in front of trees and behind trees at the same time.  The painting is therefore both a compression of time, showing in one image two things that in reality happen at different times, and a statement of fact about art being able to depict things that cannot happen in reality.

Levels Of Abstraction In Painting

Jackson Pollock’s work is as abstract as it gets.  His paint drip paintings bear no resemblance to reality whatsoever.  Just like Magritte, Pollock’s work is not about representing reality.  It is about interpreting reality in a way that, in his time, had never been done before.

Pollock’s subject is unrecognizable by looking at the painting.  The only way to discover the subject of the painting, the referent used by Pollock (see my previous essay titled The Referent), is to ‘experience’ the painting from an emotional perspective.  Sometimes the title of the painting gives away the referent.  For example, one of Pollock’s paintings is titled Spring.  I remember being confronted with Spring ‘in a Paris exhibition.  The painting was so long that it was exhibited in a large room, wrapped around the room from the right side of the door to the left side of the door.  It was hung starting from the right side of the entrance door and ending on the left side of the same door.  

The painting covered all four walls of the room, going around in one continuous piece from one end of the room to the other.  It was done on a roll of canvas that was so long the entire room, from left to right, was necessary to display it.  The painting consisted entirely of paint drips, in colors reminiscent of spring.  When experiencing this painting all I could think of was spring. It was not spring at the time, it was fall or winter, but when I looked out of the room, through the windows above the painting, I saw spring in my mind’s eye. I experienced spring when admiring this painting.  All I could think of was spring: the colors of spring, the scents of spring, the flowers of spring, the green leaves of spring, the budding trees of spring.  The painting featured nothing that was physically related to spring.  Yet the colors, the rhythm of the drips of paint, and something else, something indescribable, something I felt but could not express verbally, something that existed and manifested itself purely visually, made me think, or more accurately experience, spring.

Art And Photography

How are these remarks related to photography?  After all, photography is what I aim to teach, so there should be a relationship between abstract art and photography, there should be something we can learn and apply to our photographs.

There is.  This something is the ability to not be goaded by reality.  This is a learned ability. It means being able to distance ourselves from reality being the unique referent.  It means using a referent other than reality.  It can be a memory, a feeling, a sound, a scent.  It can be that none of these things are real, that they are all personal memories that cannot be described verbally.  For that reason, the art, be it a photograph or other, is the only way we can express them.  These things, whatever they are, need to be expressed visually.  They need to be shown, not said with words.  Words, when it comes to things abstract, fail us.  

Why are there many more abstract paintings than abstract photographs?  The question is worth investigating because a quick survey of the field of abstract art reveals this fact to be accurate.  It is easy to surmise that painters are more artistic than photographers, or that painters are more willing to experiment, are more creative or other nonsense.  However, these remarks are just that: nonsense.  Artists are creative, they experiment and they are artistic.  That’s why they are artists. The medium they use is irrelevant when considering their level of artistic involvement.  

The answer is to be found not in the personality of the artists but in the nature of the medium they use.  Paintings start as abstractions because painters start from a blank canvas. In painting there is nothing on the canvas until the painter starts painting.  Therefore, everything that is placed on the canvas is an artistic creation. In photography however the artist starts with an image capture, either film or digital, and this capture is created not by the artist but by the camera. The case can be made that the artist decides on composition, lens choice, exposure and so on.  However, while all this is true, it is the camera that creates the image, not the artist.  Therefore, when the processing and printing of the image takes place, the photographer starts not with a blank canvas but with a film or digital file filled with an accurate capture of reality.  This difference of starting point is what limits the possibility for abstraction in photography. The photographic artist has to work hard to remove reality from the camera capture in order to create a photographic abstraction.  The painter does not have to do this work because the starting point is his creation, not the creation of a machine.  To put it simply, the painter starts with an abstraction while the photographer starts with reality.

The Next Essay

The next essay will focus on dialectics, the opposition of two divergent opinions.  In it I will study the role that dialectics play in the process of generating creative ideas. This upcoming essay will be a continuation of my discussion of abstraction.  It will take abstraction in a practical direction, one that can help us find inspiration for work that is not based solely on reality.

About Alain Briot

I create fine art photographs, teach workshops with Natalie and offer Mastery Tutorials on composition, image conversion, optimization, printing, business and marketing.  I am the author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Photographic Composition, Creativity and Personal Style, Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.  All 4 books are available in eBook format on our website at this link.  Free samplers are available.

You can find more information about our workshops, photographs, writings and tutorials as well as subscribe to our Free Monthly Newsletter on our website.  You will receive 40 free eBooks when you subscribe.

Studying Fine Art Photography With Alain and Natalie Briot

If you enjoyed this essay, you will enjoy attending a workshop with us.  I lead workshops with my wife Natalie to the most photogenic locations in the US Southwest. Our workshops focus on the artistic aspects of photography.  While we do teach technique, we do so for the purpose of creating artistic photographs.  Our goal is to help you create photographs that you will be proud of, and that will be unique to you. The locations we photograph include Navajoland, Antelope Canyon, Monument Valley, Zion, the Grand Canyon and many others.  Our workshops listing is available at this link. http://beautiful-landscape.com/Workshop-home.html

Alain Briot
April 202

Elevate Your Vision

Join our community of passionate photographers.

Access our extensive knowledge archive.

Master the art of landscape and beyond.

Your Email *

Select list(s) to subscribe to

General Interest

Example: Yes, I would like to receive emails from Luminous Landscape. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.

---

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The Luminous Landscape Inc. https://luminous-landscape.com. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the  SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact.

By subscribing I agree with Terms and Conditions

Do it later