Reddit

Ehhhh, I can see it maybe being too representational for full on abstract the way people think of it nowadays. I don't agree with it necessarily, though there is always going to be a gray zone at the edges of abstract and there is a point in that zone where it ceases to be.

In this case, had I been the mod, I think I would have either left it alone by virtue of being in that zone, or left it to the community to decide via votes/reports/whatever.

Me? I'd call it abstract enough that if it was in a line-up with twenty random pieces, I'd likely point to it as abstract. If it was lined up with twenty classically abstract pieces, maybe not. I mean, it ain't Mondrian, right? At least not his later kind of abstract.

Then again, with enough explanation of what it abstracts, even by that standard, I could be easily swayed into agreeing it could stay in the line-up.

It's certainly not off by enough to knee jerk remove from a niche sub like that

Edit: what are you abstracting? What's the core of it?

Re-edit:

And, looking at it again after closing my eyes and thinking on the memory of it, I can definitely see where it might not be pure abstract. Abstract expressionist, surrealist, something like that, the gray is less gray. But the overall impression it leaves is more of a zoomed in piece of something that is figurative. It could pass as a close-up of swamp-thing in that respect.

I like it, btw. I'm just saying that as I examine it, it does stray further from what abstract means as a movement/school. Still wouldn't have just knee jerk removed it, but I can't say it wouldn't merit removal on the grounds of classification, regardless of intent.

I dunno, I tend to side with the artist when it comes to classification, but there is a degree of definition to art genres. Like, you'd have trouble billing a fast jazz track as metal, even if it was on electric instruments and had distortion, you dig?