jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (7 posts)

The world consists of lines. What is your opinion?

  1. Hui (蕙) profile image79
    Hui (蕙)posted 2 years ago

    This is "the portrait of Evans Stravinsky". Picasso created it by lines in Paris on May 21, 1920.

    1. tsmog profile image82
      tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I ponder because my mind flashes upon pixels firstly and then geometric shapes both inferring lines. Melding those two we may discover a probability with possibility. After all a line is created between two independent points (pixels), although does not require being straight.

      Regarding art we may first ask is the 'world' a work of art. A question of any art to consider is does the space define the work or does the work define the space. The lines are a known(s) of the artist and the space is of the observer perhaps as a discoverer. That offers next perspective (View Point led by cognition of memory and projection) presenting choice(s) while dances with perception(s) (Inescapable feelings).

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image81
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        ~ well yes, the world is a work of art! Thats why I love realism.

        The impressionists had it together, if you ask me.
        They would probably understand what you are talking about: pixels.
        I'm still exploring their discoveries and stuck in pre-1900's, art wise, for now.

        1. tsmog profile image82
          tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I did once take an art appreciation class. Most what was learned has been lost to time other than passions for some styles. I am an avid fan of surrealism. I look for that as context in any image. The dance with the subconscious of the artist purposely expressed or discovered as self. I see surrealism at times easily with illustrations for children books.

          The contrast of genre and influence of thought stimulated by Freud is interesting. The Automatists and Veristic Surrealists. I do lean toward the Automtists view there is 'great' meaning with work expressed.

          A peek shares it was influenced by , Dadaism, Cubism, and Expressionism. I really know very little of those. I just glanced at some impressionist for understanding. I must say I like the usage of color and great movement - motion, within those I looked upon.

          Maybe I should look more closely at art and maybe perhaps paint to. With only a bit of knowledge I think it would be interesting how those images I produce would turn out with a released spirit sort to speak contrast the once more stiff practice as that as a drafts person with defined rules.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image81
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            What I like about art is this:
            No words.
            Its so quiet.
            Art allows you to communicate with yourself.

            But, its also interesting to talk about it from the standpoint of the true challenge: Being in touch with the observer within.
            This inner connection to self is the challenge. What would you like to observe and record?

            The challenge can be to accurately depict what is without, as the realists did. It can also be to express what is within on a personal level as the post-impressionists and surrealists did.

            For instance, post impressionist, Van Gogh, painted to depict both the beauty of nature and man (without) and the emotions and feelings invoked (within). While recording what he chose to observe/reveal, he expressed what he felt through expressive brush stroke, thick paint and bright colors.
            Surrealism is more intellectual and communicates inner realities, which can be really fascinating and intriguing to explore.
            I like painting that honestly tells me about beauty and simplicity while hinting at the ever-present magic of the world. One of my favorite Impressionist painters is Camille Pissarro.

            Actually, when it gets down to it, the important thing behind painting is thought, words …   hmmm ...

  2. Kathryn L Hill profile image81
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    The world consists of lines. Not really.

    This drawing reveals a very abstract depiction of reality. Picasso used contour lines to reveal the shapes and forms he observed. He used curved and straight lines to bind shapes and forms which ordinarily would be seen and revealed as tones, values and colors. Not lines at all. 

    Ordinarily, lines are used only for crevices, (small, thin carved-out areas,) in revealing the shadows created by lips, eyes, wrinkles, ear holes, nostrils, finger crevices when held together, arms crevices as pressed against the body, strands of hair and crevasses of folds in clothing. These are legitimate areas to use line when drawing/painting realistically, as opposed to abstractly.

    Lines become abstractions when they are used to separate foreground form/s from background areas in a drawing or painting. Lines can be used to reveal the straight and curved edges of strutural forms, such as the chair and the glasses in this drawing. They can be used for texture, (hair) and patterns, (tie). They can also be used to depict feelings / emotions and energy. In this picture, you get a sense of the sitter's solemn personality based on the mood of the line. 

    Picasso could draw beautifully and realistically using shade and tone. However, he knew the rules of realistic drawing and broke them in creating exciting abstract images such as this one. Breaking the rules is quite a blast, once you understand what they are. This understanding initially comes with obedience to them.
    Intelligent disobedience is based on obedience.
    Thats what lines are … intelligent disobedience. smile

    1. tsmog profile image82
      tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with being abstract while seek to add it is as much abstraction being an action of experience as both thought and emotion. I think of M.C. Escher and maybe of oddity Salvador Dali.