"Peter McCombs" <pmc### [at] xmissionxmissioncom> wrote in message
news:slr### [at] xmissionxmissioncom...

|
| common trait of Surrealism is that the objects are usually
| very recognizable, perhaps normal at first glance, but
| obviously there is something "strange" about them.

<http://images.google.com/images?q=%22Joan+Miro%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=
en&btnG=Google+Search>
<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22Joan+Miro%22%
2Bsurrealism&btnG=Google+Search>

|
| the content is recognizable, yet bizarre. I found that
| most entries didn't match this criteria, hence lots of
| low concept scores.

It's because of this type of attitude that we see round after round
after round of "recycled old ideas from established artists in the
genre."

At the very high risk of making a fool of myself compared to some of the
more artistically aware people here like Jim and Gilles, I will offer
that I feel I'm at least in the ballpark when saying that abstraction is
an attempt to capture the essence or an essence of mundane things
whereas surrealism is an attempt to capture the perceptions and
"awareness" of states of mind where things are perceived which are in
opposition to mundane reality. How recognizable you feel the objects are
in the picture is of no relevance.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message