I have odd conflicted feelings about representation in art.
I was reflecting on why I tend towards “realistic” photo processing. Aiming for “accuracy” even while knowing that any result I end up with is an interpretation of a memory, and that the camera can never truly capture something as seen. So, I’m aware that I’m adding my interpretation to that which nature presented to me, and yet I’m striving to make that addition as invisible as possible. I was trying to understand my motivation for doing this, and it boils down to a feeling that it would be arrogant of me to attempt to “improve” on something like a flower.
Almost the opposite of the Islamic approach? An intentional veneration of my subject, with the aim of being as representational as possible. I’ve come to realize that all of this is arbitrary, and I need not be so strict with myself. But loosening up requires me to find a different relationship between artist/subject/audience and I end up feeling a bit unmoored.
Yet, I have none of the quandaries when I stick with non-representational, abstract, algorithmic, or mathematical/geometric art.
Leaving aside the religious interpretation for a moment, might there be a practical or ethical or otherwise rational justification for avoiding “veneration of the subject”?