On my page under "turn-offs," I list Abstract Expressionism. I'd really like to qualify this statement, since so many elements of abstract expressionism are necessary for good art, and not all of the genre is a turn-off to me.

First of all, when I went to college, although basic fundimentals were being taught, realistic drawing was never emphasized. I was already very good at drawing what I saw and guess I didn't need further instruction in that area, but I saw so many people coming in who could not draw whatsoever and their work was being hailed by the profs as outstanding. Many students who had never considered themselves artists before became art majors. I don't want to discourage anyone from developing a latent artistic tendency, or of even being able to enjoy creativity at any level, but I suppose I'm a fundamentalist in this regard. You have to know how to draw what you see to be able to draw (or paint) what you want.

Admittedly, I was never turned on by the likes of DeKooning, Pollock, or Rothko. Their work never really spoke to me. I did eventually learn to respect where they were coming from, but I still cannot say I can stand and look at their work and say "wow."

On the other side of the coin, I must also admit that strict photo-realism can also be a bore. Nevertheless, I've seen many "realistic" works (still lifes, portraits, etc.) which capture a scenario in a way that no photograph can. These works amaze me. Realistic pencil drawings (my first love) have a quality all of their own, and their beauty is often unequalled, in my opinion.