Editing Abstract impressionism (section)

== Criticism ==
{{See also|Abstract expressionism|Lyrical abstraction|Post-Impressionism}}

=== Stylistic criticism ===
Abstract impressionism has been criticised for its legitimacy, and its inability to distinguish itself from other movements, by many art critics.<ref name=":5" /><ref name=":11">{{Cite news|last=Bowness|first=Alan|date=1958-06-15|title=Abstract Impressionism?|page=15|work=The Observer: At the Galleries}}</ref><ref name=":12">{{Cite book|last=Watney|first=Simon|title=English Post-Impressionism|publisher=Studio Vista|year=1980|isbn=9780289708880|location=Great Britain|pages=93–108|chapter=Bloomsbury Abstraction}}</ref> After one of its early exhibitions at the Arts Gallery Council in St. James Square, [[Alan Bowness]] (a highly regarded art critic and historian) described abstract impressionism as "just another 'ism",<ref name=":11" /> without "the catalogue for the adoption of this new term [being] very convincing".<ref name=":11" /> The main point of contention regards a difficulty separating the movement from other art periods, such as [[abstract expressionism]], [[lyrical abstraction]], or [[Post-Impressionism]].<ref name=":11" /><ref name=":12" /> Bowness says that in trying to discern ''"particular qualities these pictures have in common, qualities that differentiate them from other paintings of a roughly similar type... the result is all together inconclusive"''.<ref name=":11" />

A further issue has been the widely varying degrees of abstraction in the movement, that may make visual uniformity difficult.<ref name=":11" /> Bowness notes that he finds it difficult to comprehend any unity between the artworks, and concludes that there is no movement that could rightfully claim all of them.<ref name=":11" />

=== Categorisation criticism ===
Another element of controversy within abstract impressionism comes in attempting to categorise its style within other movements.<ref name=":12" /> Art historians [[Simon Watney]] and [[Roger Fry]]<ref name=":12" /> debate over two places in which abstract impressionism may fit. They conclude to be unsure of whether it is a further development of [[Post-Impressionism]], or if it is perhaps more related to the period of Bloomsbury Abstraction within the Abstract movement.<ref name=":12" />

Additionally, many artists that the abstract impressionist movement has claimed- such as [[Milton Resnick]], [[Sam Francis]], [[Nicolas de Staël]], or [[Jackson Pollock]]<ref name=":4" /><ref>{{Cite book|last=Gooding|first=Mel|title=Patrick Heron|publisher=Phaidon Press|year=1994|isbn=9780714834443|location=New York|pages=4}}</ref>- are simultaneously considered to be members of other more widely recognised movements, such as Abstract Expressionism,<ref name=":4" /><ref>{{Cite book|last=Solomon|first=R.|title=American Abstract Expressionists and Imagists|publisher=Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum|year=1961|location=New York|pages=85–95}}</ref> whether by their own definition or the labelling of other art critics.