LEFT: A wall of “Ripped Art” – seen in the CBD Bundaberg on a tiled wall between shops – remnants of old posters. But is it Art? Is it abstract? Well, it was not intended to be art, just the remnants of posters past. It becomes art, now that someone has noticed it, and said that it is (me). I have appropriated it for my photo-art. But abstract? Maybe, maybe not. It is a true depiction via my camera, of pieces of paper stuck to a wall. So it could be classed as “representational art.” I see that term in art exhibition entry forms. A section for representational art, i.e. must represent something real. And this does just that. Same as a close-up photo or painting of the markings on the bark of a tree. Can seem to be abstract. But it is representing an actual thing – a pattern on a wall or tree. I suggest that a definition of the Abstract is really hard to pin down. Just as hard as pinning down the definition of Art. Or good or bad Art. Like a TV lawyer, I put it to you that No-one knows. And as usual when I think like this, my brain hurts.


The Art Piece is here, in downtown Bundaberg. Risky place for it, when someone could sneak around at night, chisel the tiles off, and get away with a $50,000 art piece.


Comments are closed.