Does Abstract Art Need a Meaning? Color, Gesture, Feeling

Last updated: September 27, 2026

In short: No. Some abstract painters build political or personal meaning into their work, and knowing it can deepen what you see — but it is an invitation, not an entry requirement. Color, scale, gesture and the physical presence of a painted surface act on a viewer directly. Painters themselves have long asked people to look first and explain later. A real, lasting response to a painting is a sufficient reason to love it.

Why does abstract art so often come with an explanation?

Because galleries write for the painting's history, and viewers read it as a test.

Earlier this year David Kordansky Gallery showed Shadowland, paintings by Odili Donald Odita, whose hard-edged, saturated abstractions the gallery framed within his "closely held proposition that artmaking is an inherently political act." Odita asks to be read in context: "One has to understand the context from which the person is speaking, and the platform from which they're addressing their references."

That is a serious position, and for his work it is true. It is also easy to hear it as a rule for every painting and every viewer — as if a response to color that arrives before the reading is somehow a wrong answer. The same exhibition text quotes Odita describing the moment he first understood his father's paintings, and it is not a political sentence at all: "It was like an open door to think, Oh. A shape can move a color."

Is it legitimate to respond only to color and gesture?

It is where most of the great abstraction starts.

Wassily Kandinsky wrote in Concerning the Spiritual in Art that "the more abstract is form, the more clear and direct is its appeal." Directness was the point. Reviewing Odita's show for The Brooklyn Rail, the critic Ann C. Collins engaged fully with its politics — and still recorded a first response that was pure color: on a cold morning, "the mural's vibrancy urged me to shake off any bleakness I'd carried into the room." Both responses sat in the same visit. Neither cancelled the other.

What did the painters themselves ask of viewers?

To look before they labelled.

At the 1950 "Artists' Session" at Studio 35 in New York, the painters debated dropping descriptive titles in favour of numbers. Richard Pousette-Dart was for it: "It would force people to just look at the object and try to find their own experience." Seven years earlier, Mark Rothko and Adolph Gottlieb had written to The New York Times that "we favor the simple expression of the complex thought" — complexity held in simple means, not explained in wall text.

Does interpretation ruin a painting?

Only when it arrives first and stays in charge.

Susan Sontag's "Against Interpretation" (1964) is blunt: "Interpretation is the revenge of the intellect upon art." Oscar Wilde, in the preface to The Picture of Dorian Gray, turned the whole question around: "It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors."

Contemporary philosophy of art keeps the argument alive. In Classics in Western Philosophy of Art (2022), the philosopher Noël Carroll summarises Clive Bell's formalist position plainly: "art is about form, that is formal structure." Writing on Pousette-Dart in The Brooklyn Rail this February, the critic and curator Ekin Erkan noted that the forms we respond to "are not linguistically identifiable or reducible to particular structural features" — which is another way of saying a painting can reach you before you have words for why.

How do you know the feeling is real, and not just a first impression?

Give it time, and change the light.

Look again at a different hour. Look from across the room, then from close. Come back after a week. A painting that only had a first impression will be finished by then. A painting with something in it keeps changing — a passage you had not noticed, a color that shifts at dusk, a dark that seems nearer some days than others. That return is the evidence.

What does a painter want you to take from an abstract painting?

Speaking for my own studio: presence, more than a message.

I start each painting from a color story, not a thesis, and the outcome is never planned. Not knowing is the primary draw of the work for me — surprises arrive in every layer, and a painting is finished when the surface finally settles. I am glad to tell anyone what was happening in the studio while a painting was made. But you do not need that story to be right about how the painting makes you feel. The feeling is not a guess at the answer. It is the answer the painting was made to give.

Frequently asked questions

Does abstract art have to have a meaning?

No. Some abstract painters build specific meaning into their work, and learning it can deepen your experience, but a direct response to color, scale, gesture and surface is a legitimate and complete way to value an abstract painting.

How do you appreciate abstract art if you don't understand it?

Look before you read. Notice color, scale and where your eye settles, then return at a different time of day. A painting worth living with keeps revealing something new over repeated looking.

Should I buy an abstract painting just because I like how it feels?

Yes, if the feeling holds up over repeated viewings. Liking a painting that keeps rewarding your attention is one of the soundest reasons to buy original art.

Is it rude to ask an artist what their abstract painting means?

Not at all. Most painters are glad to talk about process and intent. Treat the answer as an added layer, not as a test you had to pass before you were allowed to love the work.

Trade program and designer pricing · Start a conversation about a commission

A Shape Can Move a Color: Does Abstract Art Need a Message?