A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GEOMETRIC ABSTRACTIONISM, GEOMETRIC ORNAMENT, AND DESIGN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/facs-2025-6-39Keywords:
fine art, decorative and applied art, design, geometric abstractionism, geometric ornament, aesthetic emotion, imageAbstract
The purpose of the research is to clarify the boundaries between painting, decorative and applied arts, and design. The need to clarify this issue began to grow in the late 19th century with the emergence of various avant-garde artistic movements. This led to a gradual narrowing of the distinctions between works of decorative art and so-called «pure» art. Clarifying the boundaries between these artistic forms has both practical and theoretical significance for each of these fields. Research methods. To obtain the desired knowledge, a comparison was made not of all genres, styles, and areas of activity within these fields, but of those in which they overlap. Specifically, the comparison included geometric abstractionism (in painting), geometric ornament as a form of decoration (in decorative and applied arts), and interior design (the visual surface design in this type of design can coincide with both works of geometric abstractionism and examples of geometric ornament). One of the fundamental observations used in the analysis of the problem under study is the instances in which the visual form of paintings is identical to that of decorative and applied art and, at the same time, to the projects created by the designer. Scientific novelty. In analyzing the problem under study, the following understanding of art was substantiated: a work of art is an object that is an image of another object and evokes positive or negative emotions in a person (if a phenomenon evokes emotions, then its image evokes the same emotions, called aesthetic). It is substantiated that geometric abstractionism reproduces the geometric features of the human cultural environment. It is also substantiated that painting belongs to applied art. Conclusions: 1) geometric abstractionism should not be classified as non-objective art: the imagery of a compilation of geometric forms reproduces the geometrically rich environment of human material culture; 2) it is inappropriate to separate paintings from works of decorative and applied art, since paintings are also intended to aesthetically decorate objects (rooms)
References
Worringer W. Abstraktion und Einfühlung: ein Beitrag zur Stilpsychologie. München: R. Piper, 1911. 150 p.
Dabrowski M. Contrasts of Form. Geometric Abstract Art 1910–1980. New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1985. 289 p.
Barr A. Cubism and Abstract Art. New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1936. 249 p.
Blanc P. The Artist and the Atom. Magazine of Art. 1951. Vol. 44, No 4. P. 145–152.
Heydenreich L. Art and Science. Magazine of Art. 1951. Vol. 44, No 4. P. 140–144.
Abstract Art in the Late Twentieth Century / F. Colpitt (Eds.), Cambridg University Press. 2002. 214 p.
Inkpin A. The Complexities of «Abstracting» from Nature / P. Crowther, I. Wünsche (Eds.) Meanings of Abstract Art. Between Nature and Theory. New York: Routledge. 2012. P. 255–269.
Morgan D. The Idea of Abstraction in German Theories of the Ornament from Kant to Kandinsky. The Journal of Aesthetics and ART Criticism. 1992. Vol. 50, No. 3. P. 231–242.
The Post-Modern Object. Hans Hollein Performance Art / Collins M., Fuller P., Fischer V., Jencks C. London Art & Design. 1987. 82 p.
Read H. Art and Industry. The Principles of Industrial Design. New York : Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1935. 143 p.
