I like to think of the difference between abstract art and realism as a linear progression between two points. On the far left (not to be confused with politics), are the extremely abstract and almost obtuse works that some say could have been done by a child. On the far right are works so detailed and finely rendered that they are indistinguishable from a photograph. Somewhere in-between, perhaps rising to the top of the Bell curve, are those works where the presence of the artist shines through, both in detail and spirit. In a way, what makes something a work of art as far as I can tell, is a form of abstract realism in which the power of the artist is as much a factor as the actual subject being created.