It is obvious that you are moved by these artists and I can respect why. Since I define art as direct emotional communication where the viewer experiences the same emotion put into a work of art by the artist, you may be experiencing art via works of art by these artists.Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:26 am Yes, there's great objective value in a Pollock, and I could well describe it, but the description does not confer the value. All you need do is be in the presence of him, as that form carries as much impact as human presence.
And as you were posting while I was editing you may have have missed it, but the literalness and poignancy of identity is illustrated by de Kooning, who continued working well into senility, and that can be seen in his work even though he was an abstract expressionist more representational than Pollock.
It takes great technical skill and understanding to unleash on the canvas as they did, and it’s right there to be seen. It requires no proof of words. One might say, like seeing the ever presence of the divine. And then, to even go beyond that, to stay in the game is to become the game, the painting when all else that was, is gone. Amazing and natural. I think his work must have literally been breath.
I have a chess players mind. I need to know why the human condition is as it is in the world. It is obvious to me that the path of science leading to truth is legitimate. it is also obvious that the path to meaning coming through the paths of the essence of philosophy and that of religion are equally legitimate. The apparent conflict between them is the result of imagination
I think we would agree that intellectual knowledge has levels of quality and the greater the quality, the greater the value of intellectual knowledge. I believe it is the same with emotional quality. As opposed to the search for truth natural for science, the search for objective meaning is furthered through art of a certain quality capable of awakening another to the reality of a higher value and a natural part of our essence we are forgetting.
An artist can create sadistic expression and another can get off on it and feel the hate put into it but is it art? In one sense it is as communication but not so for the psycho/spiritual potential art is capable of.
As an aside, are you an artist, art student, collector, teacher, or just a fan? You have a lot of knowledge about modern art so I was wondering how serious it has become a part of your life.