Art.

Abstract art is in no figurative. The term \"figurative\"(representational) means: Who represents something.

Unless in your countries, the curriculum of art history is really different than I followed the abstract art is not representational.

Or they are the translation problem ...


Mes hommages.


T.

Thurysaz, it seems that you may have interpreted Black_Magnolia's post incorrectly.

\"Since the arrival of abstract art the term figurative has been used to refer to any form of modern art that retains strong references to the real world. Painting and sculpture can therefore be divided into the categories of figurative, representational and abstract, although, strictly speaking, abstract art is derived (or abstracted) from a figurative or other natural source; therefore also just a slight abstraction as elongating the legs of the horse and elephants in Dali's 'Temptation of St. Anthony' is enough to make it abstract art...\"

I am assuming you refer to that paragraph.

I myself interpret this as meaning that Abstract art more or less starts with something real (hence: derived) or if you will, a source which when normally painted would be considered figurative art.

She then goes on to say that parts of it are modified to make it unrealistic (unrealistic proportions) such as her example of the horse with elongated legs being considered abstract.

As a summary? Abstract art can start as something figurative, however, proportions can be changed and it would be considered abstract.

Photo of a horse:


\"Whistlejacket\" by George Stubbs, 1762 - example for figurative art:


\"Rearing Horse\" by Leyla Munteanu - example for abstract art:

Ooh..I love \"Rearing Horse\" by Leyla Munteanu. The colours are so pretty..Reminds me of a stained glass window. The way the shades of colour are done..

i love those horses!!!
them are really nice!
..i love both