Jonathan wrote:Actually, as I think of it, there's something to that, because that "abstract art" bullshit like a canvas painted solid black or two squares and a circle get on my nerves, because I damn sure can do that crap.
Yeah, Rothko is like that, but then when you get a mere 2-3 inches away from the canvas it becomes a landscape, and it's (to me) incredible.
Lots of people DO feel that way about abstract and modern art, and I did to until I spent a year in an art museum. The modern stuff is all a reaction to what came before, which is a reaction to the style before that. Basically the Monet of waterlilies, bridges, and sunsets, the staple of aprons, notecards, and dentist's offices was, in his day, held in the same esteem that the "two squares and a circle" type pieces hold for you. He was pretty well despised by the art establishment because he basically has blobs of color on the canvas without real definition. (thus endeth the lecture!)
The art I'm most comfortable with, though, is folk art, because anyone can do it.