Landscape is one of my favorite genres of painting and, for me, it comes in many forms. I do not distinguish between “abstraction” and “realism” as far as their power to render a scene or evoke memories or response. I have painted both ways, and feel that all my abstract paintings were the evocation of particular landscapes at specific moments. I see abstraction as a way to find a corollary (objective correlative) to the multi-sensual experience of light, space, form, tone, color that makes up the physical world. The brain creates a reference for all symbols, and it does so in the only framework it is programmed to to use associatively, i.e. the physical world. For me, it’s all about how to transmit and evoke the maximum amount of information that provokes an interactive experience.. There are many ways to skin that cat. I will talk later in another post about the way we actually see and the phenomenology of perception. (Basically what we we think of as hyper realism is not the way we actually see, but a very “abstract” manipulation of “reality.” ) Meanwhile, I hope you enjoy these landscapes and that by looking at these kinds of pairings together you get a sense of why I feel them both to be equally evocative.
I’d like to hear your reactions to these different approaches to “landscape,”
and which you prefer.