> > ... It's a misuse of the > > word, drawn from painting where genuine abstraction is possible. > > People see > > they geometric or other non-figurative properties of a > painting and > > think > > that that's what abstraction means, and consequently misapply it to > > photographs. > > Abstraction can still exist in photographic works, although I agree > that the word abstract is often misapplied to photographs where the > content is simply difficult to parse visually. Abstraction in > photographs means that the intent and emotional impact of the > photograph transcends the literal context or content. Since > photographs are recordings of light reflecting or being absorbed by > subject matter in one way or another, every photograph has some > "thing" as its content, as its representational core. But abstract > concepts and emotions like irony, sadness, joy, beauty, pain, loss, > strife, power, wealth, etc. can be seen beyond the representational > aspect of that content, drawn out by the juxtapositions of the > geometry, the colors or the situational context represented in > content, similar to how painters use color, geometry, > juxtaposition of > figurative elements, etc, to do the same thing. >
that's a perfect example of equivocation. Abstraction in painting refers to the removal (ie abstraction) of representation & subject matter from paintings, leaving only the formal properties of point, line, surface, volume, space, form, tone and colour. That's the type of abstraction you refer to when you first use the word - abstraction opposed to representation. You then use abstract in opposition to concrete, though I question whether many of your examples are abstract, such as emotions, wealth and power. That is not what abstraction in painting refers to. Mondrian, Kandinsky, Pollock and others are classic examples of abstraction in painting. The purpose is nothing to do with the concepts you list (except in so far as art is a means to wealth, power and strife!), rather the purpose is to make the formal properties themselves the subject of the work. This is not possible with photography because of its inherent relationship with subject matter and our expectations that photographs are 'of' something. So-called abstract photographs always end up as some sort of party game where people try to guess what they are of. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
