[Republicanprofessor]

Reply to post 24. Too much to quote here.

Your rose is fine and reproduces well online. Yes, it is a bit "trite and pedestrian." And that's exactly what the more adventurous artists react against.

Now, Kandinsky is at a concert in this work. Can you see a musical instrument in this? I can. (Hint: it's big and black.) On the left are impressions of people: the audience, the other musicians, it doesn't matter. What is neat is how the rounded arcs could represent their heads, their chairs or even the melodic line (if you can say that about Schoenberg's music....see the clip on my answer to John O.) I like abstract art because the content can work on those different levels.

And Kandinsky is searching for new kinds of expression: new, brighter uses of color, freer line with out outlines, flat space. Some of the colors could be said to clash; so do the sounds in Schoenberg's music.

I love teaching this in an interdisciplinary class, where the hands-on connection with students is a bit better than on the internet.

BTW, I didn't "get" this stuff right away. It took some reading, looking and listening. Now I love it. Different art for different folks, eh?

[Sloth]

Ah! I wouldn't have recognized the piano if you had not mentioned it. I did get the people along the left side (the curves equalling heads, as I saw it), and even a sense of perspective.

BTW, when you originally posted it, I thought this was the one you were unsure of the title, and said 'train', so I thought maybe I was looking down a train platform. But clearly, the Kool-Aid Man (below) can be spotted enjoying the performance in the upper left portion of the scene.

Yes, it is a bit "trite and pedestrian." And that's exactly what the more adventurous artists react against.

I'm sure that many modern artists would be willing to forgive my realistic/representational approach, if I showed Christ being sodomized with a chainsaw, or something.

Now, to show I'm not a complete reactionary, I'll give an example of someone modern who often uses what looks like formless blobs of paint, but can actually produce worthwhile art with them: Chuck Close. His work takes real effort & talent, because it matters what the final product looks like when seen from a distance. (Sort of pointilism on a macro scale, I guess?)

[Sam Cree]

I like the Kandinsky a little better now that you have pointed out that it is representational after all ;-)

[Doctor Stochastic]

Looks like a piano sounds.

It's not the lack of understanding but the lack of understanding the lack of understanding.

Beethoven always sounds to me like the upsetting of a bag of nails, with here and there an also dropped hammer. -- John Ruskin