Cephalopods have a visual language that may be considered artful; they flash color-forms on their hides to communicate intents and emotions. Formalist inspired artists and their critic-expositors describe abstract pattern-painting as though it were a visual language equal to that of the cephalopod. In this article, the author argues that although it can be reasoned that cephalopods get the correct message by observation, it cannot be imagined that observers can get any message from abstractionist painting. As such, this casts suspicion on the formalists' claims about visual language. The author further explains that if the basic function of a visual art is to communicate a specific reference visually, then formalist painting cannot be a visual art. He also relates how prior to twentieth century, painting was language-like. After the twentieth century, the metaphorical sense of language in art was terribly weakened. (Contains 17 notes.)