A picture tells a thousand words.
...or in the modernist case; it requires a thousand words to describe the picture.
This image actually makes me want to puke. To think that you could marginalize an entire sect of art with a single image, and take incredibly biased peices from the two different styles and attempt to compare them.
It's like taking a very rotten apple and setting it next to a delicious looking orange and saying: "look this is an awful apple, therefore all apples are shity. This is a delicious looking orange, therefore all oranges are good and superior to apples."
On another note, because you don't Attempt to understand the ideals and goals of modern art, looking at it from a completely aesthetic viewpoint in compression with something that focuses on aesthetic is going to lead to a warped view of what the modern piece is and what it is trying to convey.
Time for another analogy:
You put a tribal mask of an African tribe that has used for ceremony for hundreds of years, and you take it and put it in a western art mueseum and compare it to western aesthetic. Obviously the tribal mask will be deemed barbaric and simple compared to the western pieces, but that is because you are taking something out of its context and inserting it ( and trying to force t) into the context of something else and expecting it to work.
Poll