Well, I was just looking at some reproductions of figure paintings of the likes of Alice Neel, Richard Diebenkorn, Rufino Tamayo, and , of course, Pablo Picasso, and I marvel at their level of inventiveness and independence. It's the way they create shapes and forms that one does not see in nature, thus making their "representations" more than efforts at copying things. While I enjoy much of the work of painters who "reproduce" for us beautiful things found in nature (like that of O'Keefe) I enjoy more the total fabrications of works like those mentioned above (and sometimes O'Keefe is one of them), and I would prefer to create "beauty" from scratch--one day I'll succeed. So it's not just a questions of abstract vs. representational art; it's still, as far as I'm concerned, a matter of presenting realities vs. representing realities. What do you think?