Is abstract art "not real art" if it doesn't generate any emotions at all?
I think you’ll find abstract and modern art evokes quite a lot of emotion. Quiet a lot of indignation from people who “know what real art is”.
I am sure that there is some abstract art that is intended not to produce any emotion whatsoever, but this is absolutely not the norm. Rothko paintings, rather famously for example, produce complex emotions like dread and unease.
In what subset of the population? Maybe this is just due to my own neurodivergence, but abstract art does absolutely nothing for me emotionally or cognitively... it's arguably less interesting than a blank canvas because at least a blank canvas invites me to imagine what could be, rather than imposing something so meaningless and ineffectual upon me.
This is true for all art. I don't feel much emotion from an early renaissance marian icon but I do feel a lot of emotion when experiencing an Agnes Martin painting. The point is that abstract art is not emotionless.
Reflecting on this more, I'm not sure traditional illustrations actually do much for me in general. I am incredibly deeply moved by certain examples of photography, cinematography (both with and without explicit storytelling attached), architecture, and engineering, but I don't think paintings in general have much of an impact on me emotionally.
Maybe I'm just uncultured.
>I am sure that there is some abstract art that is intended not to produce any emotion whatsoever