Thanks, they seem like more than just random splashes of color.. possibly I'm anthropomorphising but it feels like it was straining to draw something specific like a young child would.
I agree there is intent there, but it doesn't look like an effort to draw a still life, more like the chimp was fascinated with the patterns and techniques it could manipulate.
Yes, same with Koko. I think they do not fully understand art and abstraction, nor profits made by good art. It is too abstract.
They can, however had, understand sign language and symbol language, and basically that art is also an abstraction. Will probably take a while before we can identify abstract art by apes.
Hey, she did her best.
It’s hardly distinguishable from modern art though!
I've found another[1] on a blog post[2], captioned as follows:
Not sure what the background of the author is, but this essay/lecture note discusses ego or literal self-awareness of apes contrasted against human children, using quotes from books. Apparently apes don't exhibit explosive growth of vocabulary, show use of syntax etc etc, and are therefore not able to acquire language. The post later also argues their ego may be on the edge of formulating but must be weak/incomplete.There's also magazine excerpt[3] on a page on relevant Kyoto University research center comparing an inpainting task done by a chimpanzee and a human child of 3 years old, showing that chimpanzees can only recognize and trace existing patterns, whereas kids go and complete the face with eyes, nose and mouth.