The equivalent here would enticing someone into the East Wing, where some sensory experience of abstract art replaces the traditional procession of pretty pictures.

And ultimately, that’s why I thought the docent failed so miserably: I can’t see how “I don’t get it, you don’t get it, but some expert somewhere says he gets it, so deal with it.” instills any interest in returning or figuring it out.

Scott’s optimistic interpretation isn’t borne out by the totality of the docent’s uninformed spiel, which went on to talk about what the Still was “about.” Scott’s mention of “searching for what was actually ‘good’” is the docent’s problem, too: an unwillingness or inability to address abstraction as part of the popular, shared culture.

The Still is 70 years old, for pete’s sake; I don’t think it’s too much to expect for the NGA of all places, to be able to talk about abstraction’s relevance in ways that don’t require an art history PhD.