At some point in our childhood, when we first start to apply our newly-formed minds to understanding the world around us, we all stumble upon a question that, for all its simplicity, stumps parents and philosophers alike: “How do I know that what I´m seeing is really the same thing that everyone else is seeing, too?” It´s an elementary question, but a persistent one, and the fact is that no matter how high minded and erudite critical theory may become, no one has really come up with a satisfactory answer. It basically amounts to a fundamentally irresolvable conflict between objectivity and subjectivity, fact and feeling, knowledge and interpretation. In the realm of art theory, this debate touches upon essential questions about the role of art and its influence on the artist, the observer, and, ultimately, society as a whole. Should art reflect and reveal the world around us or should it be a tool of individual expression? Should the artist create works that build universally appealing bridges between people or should each observer have the right to take his own, subjective impressions away from a work of art? The rift between those who believe that art should cling to objective realities and those who see it as a vehicle of subjective interpretation is long standing and has many splintering and diverging fault lines. During the past 150 years, however, it has basically boiled down to a debate between abstraction and realism and, more recently, representations of the hyperreality of a consumerist, media dominated world.