Abstraction And Illusion

by Samia A. Halaby, April 1995

Abstraction is just as connected to nature and reality as is illusionism. It relies on reality as its only source. I disagree with historians and critics who claim that it is based on purely mental formulations.

Even though the representation of nature may seem more direct in an illusionist painting its presence is not more significant than in abstraction. While illusionist painters approach nature from a single point of view, abstractionists seek to extract and depict general principles of motion. Whereas the illusionists paint their subject while sitting still in one place, an abstract painter may walk around a subject or contemplate how it resembles other things.

To paint the morning, Monet painted a cathedral bathed in light from one point of view. He captured the morning colors of a specific season and place. To paint the morning an abstract painter, on the other hand, may select any one of numerous palettes which would describe morning, use the shapes more likely to be seen early in the day, and as much variation of rhythm and detail of texture as would communicate a flavor of morning. Thus while the illusionist captures particulars while the abstractionist captures the essence of things.

Because abstract representations deal with general principles their content excludes the imaging of particular objects and specific people. This frees them from the burden of illustrating any one nation's mythological and propagandistic agenda. As a consequence, they transcend national boundaries more readily. It makes sense, then, that in the history of the twentieth century, abstraction began with the international spread of Cubism and Constrctivism.

If you wish to comment click -» HERE

Copyright, Samia A. Halaby, 1998, All rights reserved. To request permission to reproduce any part of these pages click above.

Select from the following menu representing the entire studio: 

[Art on the Net][Gallery][Studios][What's New]