A way to justify the intention of expecting to include under the same
tendency different art forms and artists who are partially linked to the topic.
Not exact matches
Although many
different styles are encompassed by the term, there are certain underlying principles that define modernist
art: A rejection of history and conservative values (such as realistic depiction of subjects); innovation and experimentation with form (the shapes, colours and lines that make up the work) with a
tendency to abstraction; and an emphasis on materials, techniques and processes.
While there is a
tendency to more easily dismiss it, I don't really view painting as any
different than any other medium in terms of validity in contemporary
art.
Rowena Hughes's works follow a
different tendency of
art history with its Duchampian assemblage.
The recent exhibition at the Museum of Modern
Art in New York proposed a very
different schema, conceiving of «Conceptualism» as a transnational
tendency, a network.
Curiously, the same degree of fragmentation was occurring in Europe: the main movement
Art Informel, which corresponded to Abstract Expressionism, comprised numerous
different styles and
tendencies, such as Tachisme,
Art Non Figuratif, Abstraction Lyrique, and others.
A similar type of fragmentation was occurring in Europe: the main abstract expressionist movement
Art Informel, broke up into numerous
different styles and
tendencies, such as Tachisme,
Art Non Figuratif, Abstraction Lyrique, and others.