since you guys are a fountain of insight -
the strangest things result when i am working on things
if you read my latest composition
it actually came while i was brain storming ideas for science fiction involving professional wrestling
but
thats beside the point
the question i have is this -
is there a difference between ABSTRACT art
and
art that uses the power of SUGGESTION?
personally
i hate abstract art - the type that borders on nonsense
but
the thing that seems to separate 'art' from a straight up essay
is the use of metaphor and suggestion
rather than the use of blatant messages
does anybody have any insight on this?
i am thinking about it and it is making my head hurt
it may even be a retarded question
thanks
I think what you suggested is pretty much how I look at it. I've just finished a course on Greek poetry (dont laugh) and we spent ages looking at symbolism and metaphor. It was almost a mythology class, learning about the traditional views of the Gods and how these were subverted and changed by using those symbols in a different sort of poetry.
Thats my two cents, at least.
i think i just hate when it seem like something is abstract just for the sake of being abstract
there is a lot of power in the pen
why make sparklers when you can make fireworks
Quote from: LHXi think i just hate when it seem like something is abstract just for the sake of being abstract
there is a lot of power in the pen
why make sparklers when you can make fireworks
What about music?
Wouldn't you say that music is a completely "abstract" form of art?
It's jus a sequence of sounds, after all.
I like abstraction because it gives you white noise to allow your mind to fill in the blanks.
You learn more about yourself from abstraction IMO.
The only literary thing I'm good at is editing/proof reading.
Quote from: Baron von HooplaI like abstraction because it gives you white noise to allow your mind to fill in the blanks.
You learn more about yourself from abstraction IMO.
I second this opinion, but I also think that there is a type of writer who throws in the "abstract" to whatever they are working on just to make it seem either a) smarter than it is or b)more important than it is.
IMHO abstraction that works to illustrate some larger point (even if it itself only lends a hand towards the whole written work making a point) is good. Abstraction for the sake of sounding "abstract" is crappy writing.
Troof.
In a linear medium like literature, "abstract" seems to imply either non-sequitor, gibberish, or references and analogies so far above the reader's comprehension as to be illegible.
Prime examples of the Latter being Finnagans' Wake and The Book of Lies.
Also the Circe chapter in Ulysses. And, the last chapter of Beautiful Losers.
An example of the former would be every single time RAW writes about Chapel Perilous.
Or the terrible chapter in his book "Coincidence" where he is attempting to defend that sort of writing by creating the worst cut-up of ALL time.