large painting canvas-When the word “impressionism” was widely used, both by propaganda and for its own good, Buy Big Canvas Art the ideas vaguely encapsulated in it undoubtedly spread.
People no longer ask an artist, does he paint beautifully?
But is he an impressionist?
The onslaught on it will only show that it is an overly powerful art movement.
It’s hard to kill it by ignoring it;
Nowadays, Big Abstract Art for Sale there is hardly a newspaper article on painting or similar subjects that can reasonably end without insinuating or ridiculing the sense of impression.
Impressionism is based on certain basic ideas which are somewhat perplexing and confusing, as can even be seen from the difficulties found by sympathetic amateurs.
The difficulty he encountered when he came into contact with the impressionist prophets,Big Modern Wall Art who had a nasty
habit of declaring their favorite old masters to be representational impressionists, did not diminish the difficulty he encountered when he came into contact with them.It may no longer surprise us to call Velazquez and Reynolds impressionists.
But I’ve even heard that Botticelli was announced by an enthusiast as the prototype for Monet and Degas.
If, as some have argued, impressionism is really a useful term for accurately tracing a definite trend in art, then it seems worthwhile to study it from a scientific standpoint in order to save it from being reduced to meaningless misuse. Minimalist Painting Canvas Art
This misuse is due to the following reasons: the artists who use the word so often are now very clever at keeping their philosophical questions of art secret, and are unable to give reason for their beliefs, just as Socrates annoyed pallasius in the past.
In fact.The fact that artists can easily reject the ideas on which I have placed my trust should not itself be taken as evidence that they are not working under the unconscious influence of these ideas.
Now, the conclusion I am trying to draw is not so much an analysis of the objects of experience as an analysis of the nature of experience itself.
In my opinion, it may be indicated that, in the art of painting, a similar process (that is, not the analysis of visual objects, but the analysis of the nature of vision itself) has surprisingly led to similar results.
Because, as for experience or daily scientific purposes, we assumed the outside and the existence of matter that is independent of our senses, for the purpose of the daily life, we are also ongoing established on the basis of the flow of
a visual visual perception, think that it is a kind of independent and absolute existence, we will they hold for fixed and determine defined by the surface of the same things, too Is what we call it the “things”.
Such a view of everyday life was accepted by the early painters who tried to reproduce things, which was very natural, because they did not analyze their own feelings, but examined things themselves.