As 2.0’s first and only (to my knowledge) contributor who comes before you from the left side of the fence, I have to admit that I’m a bit conflicted on which direction my initial posts here should take.  Should I dive right into politics?  Religion?  Miscellaneous deep thoughts? 

Upon taking many things into consideration, though, I’ve decided to start out slow.  “Baby steps”, as they say.  I thought it’d be a better idea to take this opportunity to expose 2.0’s readers to a subject that is of interest to myself and many liberal thinkers:  Art

Art, of course, is one of the hardest things in the world to universally define.  One man’s art is another man’s act of blasphemy, after all.  But for the most part, the principles and elements of art, and the interpretation and evaluation of artwork are accepted as something that can be discussed once that precondition has been met (that what you’re looking at is, in fact, “art”).

Now, growing up, I was never particularly interested in much of it.  Like many of my friends, I had a hard time staying awake in high school and college when the instructor would talk about the Neoclassical period or Cubism.  I don’t remember caring too much if the artwork was balanced symmetrically or asymmetrically, or if there should be some sort of virtue attached to discovering that, say, Michelangelo’s perspective was more about an allusion to space than an illusion of space.  I remember just wanting to get a good grade.

Later on in life, however, I began to really appreciate the genius of it all, and today I take the time to visit museums and often find myself shopping for various prints online.  I’ve become all “artsy-fartsy”.  (there, I said it).  What led to this transformation?  I’m not sure.   But I suspect that most people didn’t drink coffee growing up either, so, whatever.

Anyway, I figured that a neat twist for the blog might be a little art evaluation exercise.  I’m going to see if I can get you guys to reveal your inner vintage-wine-sipping, turtleneck-wearing, fake-British-accent-sporting, art snobbish selves.  And to double up on the fun, the featured piece will be one out of my own personal collection:

Piper Interlude in G♭

 Hints:  Note the use of color to enable a purposeful distinction between figure and ground, and how the use of repeating shapes relates to the emphasis and movement.  What conclusions do you draw from the unity, and how does it effect the composition?  Put it all together, and dig a little deeper.  What is the Piper’s motivation?  Based on what you see in the background, ask yourself, where is he?  Why might he be there? 

Now discuss…