Non-objective art is a form of abstract art that doesn’t depict anything recognizable from reality (no objects, people, or scenes we can connect with). It hides behind intellectual jargon, claiming to explore ideas through shapes, colors, and lines which inherently lacks depth, emotion, or any other true meaning. For me, art should resonate with the viewer, telling a story or provoking thought, but non-objective art misses that mark. Instead of inviting us into a shared human experience, it becomes a confusing puzzle of meaningless forms. I understand that the "art" in these works is the creation of the art itself. I get it. I just don't enjoy it is all.
Now, don’t confuse this style with abstract art. Not all abstract art lacks subject matter. While styles like abstract minimalism simplify forms, they still retain a recognizable subject at its core. The difference? Minimalism reduces reality to its essential elements, while non-objective art completely ignores reality altogether, offering no connection to anything beyond itself.
Here is some famous non-objective art



"Composition VIII" by Wassily Kandinsky (1923) - $41,000,000
“Suprematist Composition" by Kazimir Malevich (1916) - $60,000,000
"No. 6 (Violet, Green and Red)" by Mark Rothko (1951) - $186,000,000
Comments