Concrete art (edit: actually I mean, representational art) is art that is based on real life things like animals, plants, nature, and stuff like that.
Abstract Art is based off stuff like geometrical shapes (like cubes, grids, spheres, etc.).
I like both, but abstract art is more captivating to me for some reason.
Abstract is truth.
shareI like both but I REALLY like surreal and dark art like H.R. Giger, R.S. Connett and a lot of stuff on devientart.com
shareAre you familiar with Sibylle Ruppert? Pretty sure you'll dig.
https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ACYBGNQfr0B_RRSSJK3K6SaY0z0bluoSNw%3A1575678736848&ei=EPPqXf2oM8TGsAWzi4OoDw&q=sibylle+ruppert&oq=sibylle+ruppert&gs_l=psy-ab.1...0.0..2965...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz.RkEXvy2Et5U
Thanks for that. Cool stuff!
shareI enjoy both
Living where I do, I must admit that I lean much more towards the "concrete" art.
I also like abstract art because I can just let my imagination pursue seldom used paths.
Concrete
shareJust have to pop in and be *that guy* for a second...
What you're calling concrete art is actually called "representational art".
"Concrete art" is actually a geometric abstractionist movement.
Anyham, I see them as a continuum, and there have been many movements that have elements of both or blur the boundaries. Now that the art world has historically long gone beyond movements challenging the limits of figuration and abstraction, approaches in the space between are a thriving contemporary traditionalism, and new movements are conceptually and technologically oriented, "post-internet", for instance. We could also add conceptual art to the question.
Any way you slice it, post examples of stuff you like guys!
representational
shareI don't know about abstract art, although a lot of people like it. I just finished watching a film about Vincent van Gogh and it was pretty fascinating, His art is somewhat strange but I like it.
shareWas it Lust for Life?
shareThere's a film called Loving Vincent that is fully oil painted animation in the style of Van Gogh btw:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGzKnyhYDQI
I haven't seen it yet because it looks too cool and I'm scared.
It's great.
But I have a hunch the other poster is talking about At Eternity's Gate. It just popped up on Showtime this month.
I recently picked up a DVD of this and think Christmas will be a good time to watch it.
shareSurreal/impressionistic art that gives you an artists interpretation of a thing is great.
Not a fan of stuff that looks like someone spilled several bottles of paint on a canvas, though. Modern, totally abstract art is a confidence game, IMO. I remember reading a story about an experiment where a monkey was given some paint to throw at a canvas and the work was submitted to a big exhibition that drew professional critics. They were divided on the monkeys work about 50/50. None of them picked up on the fact that it was the creation of a monkey.
I read another story about an exhibition in which one of the artists works didn't show up. So there was nothing to display but the fancy stand that was going to hold the work. In that case the critics reviewed the stand, mistaking it for the work of art itself, most of them positively.
So yeah, if you think you're smarter or deeper than the average Joe for "getting" that kind of stuff, you need to check yourself.
Not out to try to dismiss your take in saying this, but I do think to a large degree the sense of "pretension" surrounding abstract, conceptual and performance art that some people feel comes from the frustration of those who don't like it or interpret (key word interpret) that the work is trying to outsmart or trick them in some way themselves. And to be sure, sometimes works are putting on airs, or are in it for uninspired purposes, though it can be hard to know for sure when that is. And I can't deny the financial implications of certain works and institutions rightly play into that sense of frustration. But I think artists are most often not out to outsmart or trick you, and are being genuine.
share