Search This Blog

Saturday, August 13, 2011

Say It Loud




Lord Krishna“…O son of Kunti, declare it boldly that My devotee never perishes.” (Lord Krishna, Bhagavad-gita, 9.31)
In the Bhagavad-gita, one of the most famous discourses on spirituality ever to take place, Lord Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, encourages Arjuna, His cousin and just-turned disciple, to boldly declare it to the world that the Lord’s devotee never perishes. In case there was any doubt on the matter, Arjuna could settle the issue once and for all by making the proclamation at the direct insistence of his teacher and life and soul, the Supreme Lord. But to the keen observer, this sort of proclamation almost seems unnecessary, as the discussions in the Gita open with the issue of eternal life and how the soul is not slain when the body is slain. Indeed, it was Arjuna’s hesitancy to fight and kill members of the opposing army on the eve of a great war that led to his approaching Krishna for guidance. If no one ever really dies, what is the need for proclaiming that devotees never perish? The distinction actually lies in the identity of the individual. Though the spiritual spark never fizzles, when it changes bodies, everything is reset. For the bhakta, since he is devoted to Krishna and on a train going back to the spiritual world, none of his efforts go to waste. Therefore his identity remains intact despite changes in body.
ArjunaArjuna was the leading fighter for his side. There was little doubt about the result of the impending war due primarily to Arjuna’s tremendous fighting prowess. Two families were at odds over the right to rule over the kingdom in Hastinapura, which is situated in the area known today as Delhi. The Pandavas had the rightful claim to the city, but the Kauravas had unjustly usurped control. Now the war to end all wars was going to settle the dispute. Arjuna, one of the five Pandava brothers, was an expert bow warrior, as this was the weapon of choice in the time period that these events took place. Never mind that Arjuna had Lord Krishna on his side as his chariot driver, the Pandavas had all they needed in the skillful mastery of the military arts found in Arjuna.
Despite their advantage, there was one slight problem. Just prior to the war’s commencement, Arjuna became hesitant to fight. He wasn’t afraid of losing. In fact, his feelings were rooted in just the opposite direction. He was fearful of what would happen if his side won. How could he live a life full of royal opulence knowing that teachers and cousins fighting for the other side were slain by his arrows? How could he enjoy a single day of life knowing that others had been deprived of their ability to live theirs? He would rather have renounced everything, taken up the life of a beggar, and allowed others to maintain their vital life breath. His thinking was similar to that of a good parent who risks everything for the health and safety of their children. Who could argue against the validity of Arjuna’s feelings? Shouldn’t we all follow our heart?
“For the soul there is never birth nor death. Nor, having once been, does he ever cease to be. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing, undying and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.” (Lord Krishna, Bhagavad-gita, 2.20)
Lord KrishnaSomewhat surprisingly, Lord Krishna stepped in and sort of laughingly chided Arjuna for his thinking. Not that Krishna intervened without being asked. Arjuna had made up his mind that he wanted to quit, but he was not fully convinced that it was the right course of action. He put the matter before Krishna to see what should be done. The Lord told Arjuna that his behavior was not very becoming of a warrior or a learned man. The central teaching of the Vedas is that we are not our bodies. What we consider as birth and death are simply the acceptance and rejection of temporary forms, with the soul remaining the vital force the whole time. Lord Krishna reminded Arjuna that the soul is not slain when the body is slain. Since the modes of material nature handle the different changes that take place to the body, it is silly to think that anyone can be killed or that any person can be solely responsible for another’s death.
This instruction was given with a purpose. It was Arjuna’s duty to fight in this war, for if he didn’t protect the rules of society, the laws governing man’s conduct, then who would? His desire to quit was rooted in ignorance, the idea that a person’s bodily comforts correlate to happiness. Whether Arjuna wanted to fight or not, the members fighting for the opposing army would die anyway. This is how nature works. We can try to eat right, exercise, sleep enough, and stay away from dangerous behavior, but death can still come at any time. Nature is a much more powerful force than we are. Thinking that we are capable of permanently stopping death, changing the temperature of the earth, or evolving into new species without divine intervention is simply ludicrous.
Lord KrishnaFor the benefit of Arjuna and future generations of sincere listeners, Krishna continued His discourse by delving into more important matters, such as the reason for existence and how to break free of the cycle of birth and death known as reincarnation. First, instruction on the differences between matter and spirit and the need for discharging one’s occupational duties was presented. This was followed by a brief overview of the ancient system of yoga, which as a Sanskrit word means nothing more than “addition”, or “plus”. Yoga is the union between the individual soul and the Supersoul, who is also known as the all-pervading witness. The individual soul travels through various species, and the Supersoul comes along for the ride. Yet the Supersoul, or Paramatma, is above the dualities of material existence and does not get mixed up in the enjoyments and activities the individual atma chooses to dive into.
If the Supersoul remains neutrally situated, what is the reason for its presence? Just as Krishna was Arjuna’s charioteer, and thus an overseer, the Supersoul is there to offer us guidance. He is the very same Krishna but kindly resting within our heart. As Arjuna was wise enough to seek Krishna’s guidance and fully abide by His orders, any soul can surrender unto the Supersoul and be guided from within. How to connect with the Supersoul, or God, is addressed in the yoga system, which can follow several different routes. One method of yoga involves study of Vedanta, or the conclusion of all knowledge. Vedanta philosophy is especially attractive to those who are taken by logic, reasoning, and study of esoteric matters. This path is known as jnana-yoga.
Another type of yoga is karma-yoga, where one performs their occupational duties and renounces the resulting fruits. In one sense, the advice given to Arjuna to fight was a recommendation to follow karma-yoga. Karma is distinguished from jnana because there is explicit physical work performed. Fighting is a lot different from studying; thus karma is marked by its specific actions that have reactions. But when the fruits of work are renounced, sacrificed, or simply minimalized in importance, while the consciousness is simultaneously developed, the behavior can be classified as karma-yoga.
Then there is meditational yoga, where one finds a secluded place and sits in a certain position for hours on end. The popular yoga classes of today have their roots in this practice, though the original system is meant for connecting with the Supersoul. If the conditions are just right, if there is strict celibacy and tight controls over eating and sleeping, the yogi can make tremendous advancement. Through their connection with God’s expansion residing within the heart, the yogi feels tremendous self-satisfaction, internal feelings of bliss.
When hearing of these different methods of yoga, especially the meditational system, Arjuna thought that they were too difficult to perform. After all, who can control the mind, which acts like horses let off from their leash and running in every which direction? To address His concerns, Krishna revealed a few more intimate details, information known only to those who are not envious of the Supreme Lord. Who could ever be jealous of God? It is in fact this envy that serves as the root cause behind the creation of the land we currently occupy. If there weren’t any souls desiring to challenge God in the abilities of creating, maintaining, destroying and enjoying, the earth and the other planets would never be created. Temporary manifestations are there to deal with temporary bouts of insanity, wherein otherwise pure souls think they can exceed Krishna’s stature as the Supreme Person.
“And of all yogis, he who always abides in Me with great faith, worshiping Me in transcendental loving service, is most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all.” (Lord Krishna, Bg. 6.47)
Lord KrishnaKrishna told Arjuna that of all yogis, he who always thinks of the Lord in love and devotion is the best. The bhakta, or devotee, always chants the Lord’s glories and does everything for Krishna. Since they never fail to think of Krishna, those who follow bhakti-yoga, or devotional service, are far superior to other yogis. Nevertheless, for Arjuna there was still concern over the time of death. The soul’s consciousness is measured while quitting the body, and depending on the nature of that consciousness a new type of body is granted. The real aim of any yoga practice is to have a purified consciousness at the time of death, which will then result in a spiritual body assumed in the next life. Krishna says that anyone who thinks of Him at the time of death will never have to return to the material world. They will assume a nature similar to His, i.e. they will receive a purely spiritual form whose body and soul are not any different.
The oneness resulting from thinking of God at the time of death does not create equality with Krishna. Rather, the oneness relates to the relationship that is created. In a classroom there is an equality shared between all the participants, in that they are equally part of the whole object that is the classroom. For there to be a class, there must be a teacher and a set of students. If either party is absent, the object in question is invalidated. A general must have a mission in order for his title to mean anything. Similarly, a spirit soul must have God in their lives in order for their true dharma, their essential characteristic, to be considered active. The liberated soul joins the eternal pastimes of Shri Krishna in the spiritual land, hence completing the oneness of the relationship for them, with one party always remaining superior, and the other acting in the interests of the superior with a loving attitude.
Lord KrishnaBut to think of God at the time of death is very difficult. Arjuna was concerned over what would happen to the yogi who failed to achieve pure Krishna consciousness by the time of death. Krishna told him that devotional efforts never go to waste. Should a devotee not attain full perfection in the present life, they get to start their devotional efforts in the next life from the point that they stopped in the previous one. Krishna later revealed that the devotee never perishes. Rather than state this fact Himself, the Lord had Arjuna declare it. If someone who actually practices bhakti-yoga makes the proclamation, it is more believable. God can say anything, but His statements are always challenged, as is even His existence.
There are many historical incidents that show devotees remaining fully committed in their devotional efforts despite outside impediment. The famous Prahlada Maharaja, the five year old son of a king, was harassed by his father Hiranyakashipu constantly. The demon king did not like that Prahlada was a great devotee of Vishnu, who is another form of Godhead essentially equal to Krishna. Prahlada was peaceful in his devotional efforts, but his father couldn’t tolerate this devotion shown to his greatest enemy. Therefore he tried to kill Prahlada in so many ways. But as was declared by Arjuna in the Bhagavad-gita, Krishna’s devotees never perish. Prahlada was protected by divine intervention during each and every attack. Finally, Vishnu Himself came as Lord Narasimhadeva to kill Hiranyakashipu.
NarasimhadevaThe astute listener at this point may raise the issue of whether Prahlada lived forever. “Sure he was protected when he was five years old, but did he not eventually renounce his body? Haven’t devotees and saints of the past left this world? If they were practicing devotional service, how did they die?” These are wonderful questions, as they show that the statements presented by Krishna in the beginning of His discourse with Arjuna were listened to attentively. When the Lord told Arjuna that the soul is not slain when the body is slain, the statement was meant to make him understand that the essence of individuality, the identity of the life form, always remains the same. This instruction was required, because Arjuna was basing the identities of his family and friends fighting for the other side off of their bodily forms. For instance, Arjuna was worried about having to kill Bhishmadeva, a grandfather to both the Kurus and Pandavas. Arjuna was simply worried about the material comforts of his grandfather, thinking that they would be lost once death arrived. But this loss occurs regardless. Any person who associates with their body has a very painful death, because what they think is their life is essentially taken away from them. All of the soldiers assembled on the battlefield received their identities from their souls and not their bodies or their material comforts. Thus Arjuna had no reason to lament over their potential deaths.
There is a reset of the body type, however, when death comes. The living entity must again go through the learning process and the spinning wheel of acceptance and rejection. When Krishna says that the devotees never perish, the corresponding realization is that the non-devoteesdo perish. Since the soul is always eternal, this perishability refers to their material way of life, their association with a temporary body and temporary enjoyments. Hiranyakashipu was a great example of this. He thought that because he had conquered the world and amassed great strength and wealth that he was immortal in his position. He forgot that death could come and take everything away. Indeed, once the next life starts, all of the previous life’s possessions and gains get tossed aside.
Krishna and ArjunaWith the devotee, their identity comes from their fixed position as eternal servant of God. Therefore even when they change bodies, their identity does not leave them. They only pray to forever remain engaged in Krishna’s service. Since this is a desire wholly approved of and encouraged by Krishna, the Supreme Lord ensures that their service continues uninterrupted. Thus anyone who reignites the flame of devotion just ready to be lit within the heart can be assured that their practices in yoga will never go in vain. Arjuna would succeed in conquering his mental demons and also the enemies fighting for the other side. To this day he is always associated with Krishna, for the two remain together as the Supreme Lord and His dear friend and disciple. Wherever there is Krishna and Arjuna, there is victory in devotional service. Therefore anyone who hears the wonderful teachings put forth on that famous day on the battlefield of Kurukshetra will be able to take up devotional service with full confidence, knowing that their identity asKrishna-dasa, or servant of God, will never leave them.

வாழ்க்கைல சந்தோஷமா இருக்கணும்ன்னா..



 

Photography: From Daguerreotypes to Digital Cameras

Cameras, and what they capture, forever changed our perception of the world, and of ourselves. Few inventions have had the impact of this ingenious, elegant, and deceptively simple device.
This gorgeous cornerstone volume, created in collaboration with the world-famous George Eastman House, celebrates the camera and the art of the photograph. It spans almost two hundred years of progress, from the first faint image ever caught to the instantaneous pictures snapped by today’s state-of-the-art digital equipment.
n 1848, Charles Fontayne and William Porter produced one of the most famous photographs in the history of the medium — a panorama spanning some 2 miles of Cincinnati waterfront. They did it with eight 6.5- by 8.5-inch daguerreotype plates, a then-new technology that in skilled hands displays mind-blowing resolution.
Fontayne and Porter were definitely skilled, but no one knew just how amazing their images were until three years ago, when conservators at George Eastman House in Rochester, New York, began restoration work on the deteriorating plates. Magnifying glasses didn’t exhaust their detail; neither did an ultrasharp macro lens. Finally, the conservators deployed a stereo microscope. What they saw astonished them: The details — down to window curtains and wheel spokes — remained crisp even at 30X magnification. The panorama could be blown up to 170 by 20 feet without losing clarity; a digicam would have to record 140,000 megapixels per shot to match that. Under the microscope, the plates revealed a vanished world, the earliest known record of an urbanizing America.
Daguerreotypes start as copper plates with a thin, mirror-polished coating of silver that’s been exposed to halogen gas (iodine or bromine) to make silver halide. Light hitting this compound knocks an electron loose, which attaches to a silver ion, forming a neutral silver atom. The result is that all the places on the plate exposed to light are clusters of pure silver, and the rest is silver halide.

Ross Messing, Xiaoqing Tang, Paul Ardis
Next, the exposed plate is held over a warm pool of mercury (don’t breathe!). The mercury combines with the silver atoms, creating the equivalent of a digital image’s pixel: a tiny “grain” between 150 and 800 nanometers in diameter that scatters light, making areas of the surface that were exposed to more light appear brighter. Finally, the plate is soaked in sodium thiosulfate, which washes away the unexposed silver halide, leaving dark regions — the image’s blacks and grays.
Now Fontayne and Porter’s daguerreotypes are stabilized and its details restored — 21st-century technology rescued an image from the 19th. The Cincinnati Public Library plans to make a zoomable version available online in the next year.
Photos: Daguerreotypes courtesy of the Public Library of Cinninnati and Hamilton County
The informative narrative by Todd Gustavson traces the camera’s development, the lives of its brilliant but often eccentric inventors, and the artists behind the lens. Images and highly descriptive captions for more than 350 cameras from the George Eastman House Collection, plus more than 100 historic photos, ads, and drawings, complement the text.
A foreword by the George Eastman House Director Anthony Bannon, and insightful essays by Steve Sasson, inventor of the digital camera, and Alexis Gerard, visionary founder and president of Future Image Inc., completes this illuminating study of one of the greatest modern technological achievements.

Fontayne-Porter daguerreotype
Photos: Daguerreotypes courtesy of the Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County

To match these daguerreotypes a digital camera would have to capture 140,000 megapixels. The whole panorama could be blown up to 170 x 20 and still remain crisp. Something I found fascinating was even though the image of the clock face was only 1 millimeter across the resolution was high enough to still tell the time, the picture was taken at 1:55pm and in 1945 using steamboat records to find the date when all the steamboats were in Cincinnati they determined it was September 24, 1848.
Fontayne-Porter daguerreotype
Photos: Daguerreotypes courtesy of the Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County

Wired magazine explains the process,
"Daguerreotypes start as copper plates with a thin, mirror-polished coating of silver that’s been exposed to halogen gas (iodine or bromine) to make silver halide. Light hitting this compound knocks an electron loose, which attaches to a silver ion, forming a neutral silver atom. The result is that all the places on the plate exposed to light are clusters of pure silver, and the rest is silver halide.

Next, the exposed plate is held over a warm pool of mercury (don’t breathe!). The mercury combines with the silver atoms, creating the equivalent of a digital image’s pixel: a tiny “grain” between 150 and 800 nanometers in diameter that scatters light, making areas of the surface that were exposed to more light appear brighter. Finally, the plate is soaked in sodium thiosulfate, which washes away the unexposed silver halide, leaving dark regions — the image’s blacks and grays.

The result is a one-of-a-kind direct positive — as opposed to the negative produced by modern chemical photography — with a haunting, soft, almost three-dimensional quality. Look at a daguerreotype from the wrong angle and you’ll see only a reflection: The image is trapped inside the mirrored surface."


Photos: Daguerreotypes courtesy of the Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County

Its mind boggling how crisp and clear these pictures are considering how old they are.


It is astonishing that after 175 years the daguerreotype still beats both film and digital photography in its ability to capture image detail. As an example, take a look at the “Cincinnati Panorama of 1848.” It shows a two mile section of the city waterfront taken from across the Ohio River. The panorama is made up of eight relatively small 6.5 x 8.5 inch silver plates, yet they each contain an amazing amount of detail. With a microscope you can read store signs and count the number of bricks in a wall, as you shown in the photo above.That’s far better rendition of detail than even the best digital camera is capable of capturing.

A section of the Cincinnati Panorama that is in the Gallery in full

How is this possible? For the answer we can compare how the different processes capture images. Film photography utilizes light sensitive silver crystals suspended in an emulsion to do the job. Light reaches the crystals and turns them into bits of silver. Particularly if you have taken photos with fast films you’ve seen the clumps of exposed silver called “grain.” Grain is the limiting factor in recording detail.
Digital photographs, on the other hand, are made up of millions of discrete bits of information from the sensor pixels. The pixel, like grain, limit the amount of detail you can get in an image. If you enlarge a digital image file to just 4x its normal size (800%), the image becomes millions of tiny colored squares. Daguerreotype images have been examined with microscopes and even at 30x magnification, the images are sharp and crisp.

pixels

The resolution of a digital photo is limited by these pixel squares. While the 70 gigabyte photo of Budapest, that I reported on in my previous PIXIQ post, contains almost the amount of detail of the Cincinnati panorama, it was made by stitching together thousands of individual digital images. The daguerreotypists achieved this level of detail in every single one of their exposures.

A panoramic view of San Francisco

How does this happen? Daguerreotypes are copper plates that were clad in pure silver by a process called cold-rolled cladding. Silver foil was heated and rolled in contact with a copper plate producing a surface that was .999 pure silver. The plate was then “sensitized” by placing it in the fumes of iodine vapors which resulted in the formation of silver iodide on the plate's surface. The image is then the result of the interaction of photons of light with the sensitived surface.

The first photo of a person (in the lower left) by Daguerre 1838, Paris

The “development” process for daguerreotypes was dangerous and often fatal. After the plate was exposed in the camera, it was developed in mercury fumes rising from a pool of heated mercury. This made the image an amalgam, an alloy, of mercury and silver. Unfortunately, mercury fumes are deadly and the “dark rooms” and 'dark tents' of the mid-1840s were not ventilated. This resulted in death or madness for many would be 19th century photographers.
Because the processed image is an amalgam there is no “grain.” The image is literally stored on a molecular level and that’s why the 163 year old Cincinnati Panorama daguerreotype of 1848 has such incredible detail.
One day perhaps our digital cameras will be able to do the same.
For a closer look at the astonishing Cincinnati Panorama of 1848 go to the Herald's website and click on the image in the story and you'll get to the really big picture.  


The Cincinnati Riverfront Panorama of 1848: A Window 

to the Past at the Main Library

On September 24, 1848, Charles Fontayne and William S. Porter set up their camera on a rooftop in Newport, Kentucky and panned it across the Ohio River capturing on eight separate plates a two-mile span of nation’s sixth largest city, Cincinnati.  While Fontayne and Porter knew their project was an ambitious one, they could not have imagined that the Panorama would survive more than 160 years as the oldest comprehensive photograph of an American city, be revered worldwide as one of the finest examples of daguerrean photography, and form the basis for 21st century discoveries about 19th century American life.

The invention of the first practical method of photography, the daguerreotype, by Louis Daguerre was considered a scientific wonder.  While expensive and difficult to create, daguerreotypes were noted for their superior level of clarity, exceeding later photographic methods. In 2006, the Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County contracted with the George Eastman House International Museum of Photography and Film to perform conservation work on the Panorama.  As part of the preservation project, state-of-the-art digital microscopy equipment produced digital images from the 1848 Panorama.  By combining the clarity of the original object with 21st century technology, the digitally enlarged Panorama revealed previously unseen details of American life including close-ups of river life, the urban landscape, and people at work and play, turning the masterpiece into a virtual time machine.
It’s hard for me to imagine what life must have been like before the camera was invented.
We’re all so used to being flooded with images every day that we don’t realize how comparatively scarce pictures were before the 20th century. Artists were unique in society for their ability to create images and essentially had a monopoly on art.
That monopoly ended abruptly in 1826 with the creation of the world’s first photograph by Joseph Niépce.Niepce First Photo

As you can see, it looks nothing like photographs today. It was taken from a second story window yet you can barely make out the rooftops of the adjacent buildings. Niépce’s photo is much more of a science experiment than an art form, and of course he didn’t take the picture by just pushing a button. Exposure time took more than 8 hours while the picture slowly formed on a pewter plate. Despite its crudeness, Niépce’s success led to a revolution in art.
Frenchman Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre created the first true camera soon after, based on Neipce’s scientific discoveries. Big and clumsy, these awkward boxes required not only a good knowledge of chemistry, but also the willingness to lug around heavy metal plates (instead of film) and a veritable apothecary of chemicals, beakers, test tubes, and other necessary equipment.
Robert Cornelius
Despite the hassle, the eerily perfect images that were created seemed closer to magic than anything else, and took the world by storm. Daguerreotype portraits were especially popular since up until then portraits had only been available to the rich. Eventually, for just a few dollars anyone could have a “painting” of themselves.
This self-portrait of Robert Cornelius is similar to many pictures taken during the height of the daguerrotype’s popularity. More can be found here as part of the Library of Congress’s daguerrotype collection.
Throughout the 19th century, photography was a tricky undertaking even for professionals, but with the invention of film the world changed once again.
Film replaced bulky metal plates and allowed cameras to be much smaller and more manageable for anyone to operate. By 1888 Kodak had made its first film camera and in 1901 the American public could buy a Kodak Brownie. It was the very first uncomplicated point-and-shoot camera. Simple, affordable, and so easy to use that practically everyone had to have one.
Does that last part sound familiar?
I think in a lot of ways the digital camera revolution we are experiencing today is very similar to what was happening then.
We have digital cameras in our cell phones, digital cameras on our key chains, even disposable digital cameras. Every year they get easier and more convenient. TheSony Cybershot for example now has a 3″ LCD preview screen even though it’s only 3-¾” wide. That was unthinkable just a few years ago.
New advances in technology also help us take better pictures, or at least eliminate some of the easy errors that can crop up. Several FujiFilm cameras now are installed with face recognition software for perfect auto-focusing every time.
Making pictures has become so ridiculously simple that we have to wonder where it leaves us; artists whose livelihood depend on making images? Like the portrait painters of the early 1900’s, will our skills become unnecessary as technology makes us obsolete?
I doubt it.
After all, painting survived the rise of the camera, although many predicted it wouldn’t.
And no matter how incredible camera technology becomes, at least there will always be a need for artists to push that button. Or, I suppose, to delete a lot of bad photos.


What is Abstract Art and How Should We Look at It?


Detail-of-Three-Women-by-Pablo-Picasso

So there you are, standing in front of another abstract art piece.
Perhaps it’s a painting of squares and lines, with blobs of color in between. Or maybe it’s a sculpture downtown that looks vaguely like giant mushrooms, with benches scattered around it and a plaque containing the artist’s name embedded in its base.
Abstract art is so varied and (usually) so strange that people often wonder what it means or why it is the way it is. But believe it or not, abstract art started out looking not so very different than “normal” representational art.
In medieval times, to “abstract” meant to “take away from,” and ever since then artists have always abstracted from the real world just by drawing what they see. Interestingly, the same word is used today to mean a short explanation or summary written about scientific articles and scholarly papers.
As an art term, it was in the mid-1800s that “abstract art” really became what it is today: recognizable simply because it ISN’T anything else that we can put a name to.
To a purist, abstract art should in some way represent, or at least be taken from, something real. But in all reality, the word “abstract” now tends to include all non-representational art too.
I suppose you could call me a bit of a purist, because I like finding the representational within abstract art. I’ve chosen to show you these next six images (Bull Profile Seriesby Roy Lichtenstein) so you can see exactly what I mean.
Bull-I-by-Roy-Lichtenstein
Bull I is purely representational work of art. And perhaps a little boring, although technically nice.
Bull-II-by-Roy-Lichtenstein
In Bull II, Lichtenstein adds color, distorts the shapes a bit, and introduces diagonal lines to the background. However, it’s still fairly true in the visual sense of what a bull looks like.
Bull-III-by-Roy-Lichtenstein
By Bull III, you can really see the abstracting taking place, as Lichtenstein reduces the body of the bull into geometric shapes. There’s still a “body” there, but it’s the “idea” of a bull that comes through more than a realistic image.
Bull-IV-by-Roy-Lichtenstein
Bull IV is my favorite in the series. Lichtenstein’s come up with a composition that to me contains some essence of “bullishness” but relies on very simple visual cues to do so: the curve at the head, where horns would be; the shape of the tail; and two spots of blue to delineate a multi-colored hide.
Bull-V-by-Roy-Lichtenstein
In his final piece, Bull V, Lichtenstein produces a pure abstraction, where only our own imaginations can be credited for conjuring up the idea of a bull. Of course, he’s set the stage in his other four works to make sure that our minds do exactly that.
These “steps” between reality and abstraction act almost like a slow-motion reply of the artist’s process, and for me, really illustrate the purpose of abstract art.
If you’re still wondering how to look at an abstract work of art, here’s what I do.
I think backwards from the final product and imagine how the artist first envisioned the work, then look at the finished product as a culmination of the artist’s journey.
In addition, I try to understand the overall effort that was made and appreciate the visual experience as I can – and only rarely do I look for any deeper meaning.
So don’t stress yourself out. It’s just art, after all. . . Enjoy it!

Almost Nothing: A look at Minimalist Art



Abstract-Painting-by-Ad-ReinhardtMinimalism - A canvas painted with two colors of black. Simple shapes. No brushstrokes and no emotion.
I often assume that art takes passion, but then I wonder. . .is there any here? It’s hard to say. But if Minimalism lacks passion, it at least has a reason for it.
The idea of Minimalism came about as a rejection of what art was at the time. The art world in the mid-1900s had its head spinning withAbstract Expressionism, a mixture of intense emotion and non-representational forms. Minimalism deliberately did its best to separate self-expression from art, by reducing colors, textures and shapes to practically nothing.
Although it’s not easy to pin down all of the Minimalist artists, there are a few who I think represent the idea the best.
Be-I-by-Barnett-NewmanBarnett Newman is an artist who was associated with the Abstract Expressionists and Color Field painters, but whose work I think really represents Minimalism, due to its extreme simplicity.
Most famous for his “zip” paintings, Newman would paint very large canvases primarily with one color, and then add “zips” of color running vertically up the canvas.
Much of his work really should be seen in person, due to its large scale. Newman’s biggest work, entitledAnna’s Light, was 28 feet wide by 9 feet tall.
Ad Reinhardt, another Minimalist painter, was best known for his “black on black” paintings, like the one at the beginning of this article.




He intended his work to be expressive-less paintings of no extremes, without contrast, of no interest, and lacking traditional composition.
His use of simple crossing shapes and barely two-toned colors can’t help but be unique in their own way, however.
Untitled-by-Robert-MorrisAnd finally, the last Minimalist artist I’ll be mentioning today is Robert Morris.
Both a painter and a sculptor, Morris used shaped geometric canvases or other non-traditional materials to create works of art like the triangular canvas in the picture to the right.
Minimalism to me is almost a meditative art. It’s art that doesn’t scream for attention, doesn’t try to overwhelm with emotion, and never tries to tell a story. Instead, it simply exists – perhaps as a point of reference for all other art