Non-representational abstract art, when it first appeared in the 60’s, tried to find the holistic space of the pure, spiritual, divine, sublime. Non-representational abstract art wanted to present the soul of a concept or idea by breaking the concept down to its non-representational purity. Influenced by nothing, and representing only itself. This idea non-representational abstract extended to the creator the artist and the viewer, allowing them to be in a sublime, divine conceptual space. Today nonrepresentational art value no longer is the divine but merely decoration. It has become a mixture of colors in a non-objective format that make one feel happy, content, relaxed. The pure, divine value of non-representational abstract art has morphed into how one feels about the abstract form. The value of feeling is very subjective. It is kitsch and changes often. It is mindless. It has no timeless value. It is not art. It is the aesthetic sense of the individual, the artist, the viewer. It has no value other than to the individual. Art cannot be art without integrating with something else other than individual self.
What is missing in many of today’s art forms? The discussion of ideas and concepts, and value judgements about created works. Yes, for an object to be called art it needs to be judged and critiqued. The contemporary art movements of the 60’s was triggered by the question; how can I do this differently? Not by how can I do this perfectly. This question allowed for exploration, discovery and change. But this question alone cannot create value for a work of art, for me the work needs to come from the artist’s self, the artist’s soul, the work must be independent, unique, original, the object has both the aesthetic self and the critical thinking it needs to be called art. So not all things are art, and not all artists who call themselves artists are really artists, they make things things, their things are not yet art.