Art Critiques

Yesterday I finished my condradicting art critiques for one of abstract's most recognized men: Piet Mondrian. To be honest I had a bit of fun while writing these seemingly opposite reviews while trying to run a common thread through them. Here are the beginning and endings to my two very exciting reviews!

Positive Beg. + End:

He has done it again; his brilliant works cease to amaze me and continue to stun even his early conservative critics of late. Composition with Yellow, Blue and Red, while seemingly unimpressive to the untrained eye, conveys more than simplicity but perfection. His Neo-Pasticist style continues to shine through his pieces and into the eyes of his adorers. Mondrian’s latest proves to the art world that De Stijl is still alive and breathing.

While the genre has been related to Cubism countless times, there is both a stark contrast between the two and a fine outline you can scarcely make out of the Neo-Plasticism origins. Piet Mondrian and Pablo Picasso still remain two diversely separate abstract artists in its flowering age, and yet both share the same ingenuity, the same spark in their contemporary work.

Negative Beg. + End:

Piet Mondrian has been called “revolutionary”, “a profit for the abstract world”, and “a painter to make history” but there is only one word that sums up this abstract painter: lazy. Piet Mondrian has not done anything substantial for the art world, he has not blazed a trail for people to follow, and he has taken five colors (red, blue, yellow, black and white) and painted something my son could have done in a few hours with a ruler and paint.

Principles of perfection in abstract is not a misguided idea, it is simply one that cannot be conveyed using a few black lines and a dabbling of primary colors as art.

After all of my research of both sides of the argument, I think that I learned more about the artist than I would have after only doing one perspective.