Leave a comment

Comments 5

bleodswean July 16 2015, 18:23:04 UTC
I adore Dali, too! The person as well as the artist!

And HAHAHAHA to your quip!

Of course, that's only if you think that's it is reasonable to apply any sort of meaning or analysis to surrealist art. Why would you think that Surrealism shouldn't by analyzed?????

Reply

kilobot8 July 16 2015, 18:32:07 UTC
I like to analyze things, so I always do, but sometimes it's possible to just explore an idea without having a really deep meaning behind it. Maybe he just wanted to do a picture of a woman who had drawers coming out of her. Maybe he has a particularly sensual pair of knobs on his desk. It could be as simple as...what if people had drawers? Or, it's so hot in the desert a clock melted!

This line of thinking is especially coming from the artist friends I know, who do a piece for whatever stupid reason, and then everyone looking at it ascribes it meaning they couldn't even notice while they were making it. Especially abstract art seems to provoke this response. Trying to see something there, when it's just meant to explore color or shape.

Reply

bleodswean July 16 2015, 18:46:59 UTC
*nods* Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. But this is NEVER the case with the Surrealists. ;) They worked with a thin opening inbetween the conscious and subconscious mind. They were thinkers before artists. They want their work to be viewed with an eye for the symbolic and to be interpreted in line with considering the human condition.

I agree with you that abstract art is usually just "studies".

Reply

kilobot8 July 16 2015, 18:49:39 UTC
Good to know!

I haven't really studied art history at all, so I didn't know that was such a giant part of that school of painting. I mostly know how to identify schools of painting by "what the art looks like" in general and not much beyond.

It seems I am definitely a surrealist ;)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up