Access to the full content is only available to members of institutions that have purchased access. If you belong to such an institution, please log in or find out more about how to order.


Print
REVISED
|

Art, abstract

DOI
10.4324/9780415249126-M001-2
Versions
Published
2011
DOI: 10.4324/9780415249126-M001-2
Version: v2,  Published online: 2011
Retrieved August 17, 2018, from https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/art-abstract/v-2

Article Summary

The widespread use of the term ‘abstract’ for a category of visual art dates from the second decade of the twentieth century, when painters and sculptors had turned away from verisimilitude and launched such modes of abstraction as cubism, Orphism, futurism, Rayonism and suprematism. Two subcategories may be distinguished: first, varieties of figurative representation that strongly schematize, and second, completely nonfigurative or nonobjective modes of design (in the widest sense of that term). Both stand opposed to classic representationalism (realism, naturalism, illusionism, mimeticism) understood as the commitment to a relatively full and undistorted depiction of the subject matter and construed broadly enough to cover the traditional ‘high art’ canon through to post-Impressionism. Analytic and synthetic cubism are model cases of the first subcategory while Mondrian’s neoplasticism and Pollock’s classic drip works are paradigms of the second. Though the effect was revolutionary, the positive motivations for this degree of abstraction in visual art were not wholly new. What was new was the elevation of previously subordinate aims to the front rank and the pursuit of certain principal aims in isolation from the full pictorial package. Thus abstract art variously celebrates structural and colour properties of objects, scenes and patterns; effects of motion, light and atmosphere; aspects of perceptual process, whether normal or expressively loaded; and forms expressing cosmic conceptions, visionary states or utopian ambitions. With a few exceptions (for example, the Futurists) the founders of abstract art were far from lucid or forthcoming about the significance of their work, and viewers have found successive waves of abstraction initially baffling and even offensive. But abstract art now forms a secure part of the ‘high art’ canon, though generally its appeal is less well understood than that of the classic modes of representation. Criticisms of abstract art have also become more lucid.

Issues concerning abstract art include the definition of the concept itself and the delineation of subordinate types; the relation between abstraction and other modes of avant-garde art that superficially resemble it; the magnitude of the artistic values so far achieved by the various forms; and the theoretical limits of significance attainable by abstraction as compared with the limits encountered in nonabstract figurative art. Abstract art merits attention from philosophers more than do traditional types of figurative and decorative art for at least two reasons: philosophical theories played a significant role in engendering abstraction and subsequent art-world discourse purporting to elucidate abstractions often operates with concepts requiring philosophic analysis to clarify and assess.

Print
Citing this article:
Brown, John H.. Art, abstract, 2011, doi:10.4324/9780415249126-M001-2. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/art-abstract/v-2.
Copyright © 1998-2018 Routledge.

Related Searches

Topics

Related Articles