Viewing page 40 of 44

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

5

which can be considered seriously as art" is of extreme rash judgment and not to be believed particularly, since you have not been able to cover the past and present art of Europe and elsewhere. (Neither have I.)
Contrary to the implications of your opinion, I do not believe that I have to compare my effort with another's in terms of "advanced", especially by technology. Change and changes do not necessarily constitute "advanced". Witness Frank Stella's plight. A post-plastic painter reverts to lesser ideas prior to the abstract genius "advance" of surface plastics by Piet Mondriou nearly fifty years ago.
I regard my proposal for fluorescent light as "simple" in that it is open and direct in formal presentation but, otherwise, in almost every way, it is [[strikethrough]] quu [[/strikethrough]] quite sophisticated. Shouldn't "schism" be reserved for religious separations and not be glibly applied to changes for ordinary art and artists? I believe so. Also, with our use of functioning "schism" you imply that my effort is of some cost of side issue for abstract art. Just how the hell would either you or I know now what was "mainstream abstraction" and not and/or who gives a damn,