Perceiving, interacting and computing: the process of thinking visually
It means De Stael would have considered picture 4 a classic painting and picture 5 the origin of abstraction. My artistic eye understands and agrees with him. However, I am not sure you do! I checked: unsurprisingly, De Stael is not listed under any of the "classic" art movements in the "...isms" book (picture 1). In fact he is not mentioned under any categories at all, here or in the modern version of the book (picture 2). I doubt that a hypothetical artistic version of Colin's "Trackplot" could help here: recognizing visual and conceptual patterns in De Stael's work remains too controversial at this point!
Developing intelligent enough tools to analyze art may sound like science fiction today. But it may just be a matter of time. In any case, I think it is never too late for artists resistant to technology to stretch their minds, look at how others are looking, fight "neurophobia" (as Semir Zeki describes it), and participate in the big neuroesthetic quest... maybe by starting with sharing their input for building a smart "artistic TrackPlot"!
This is part of a series of posts on the 11th International Conference on Neuroesthetics (September 2014).