Someone on a web board I sometimes frequent asked:
"Are you drawn to one particular movement, or drawn to individual artists?"
Performance Art. Marina and Ulay Abramovic, Bueys, Kaprow, etc. were deeply inspiring to me as a young performance artist. So I guess you could say I favour this "movement."
Regarding more traditional art forms, for me it is mainly European Expressionism and Abstract Expressionism, no question, plus a few others who pushed the limits of traditional art forms.
Individuals whose body of work I admire:
Paterson Ewen (always my favourite)
Marcel Duchamp (brilliant innovator)
John Singer Sargent (watercolours only)
Dave Beckett (pastel)
Oh there are so many...
Growing up, I was only vaguely aware of a few artists, notably Dali (saw a few in a New Brunswick gallery during a family vacation) and the Pre-Raphaelites via posters on a friend's walls. But later as a first year art history student, I spent a life-changing hour in a gallery with Oscar Kokoschka's "Die Windsbraut." Later that same day, another hour staring at and hallucinating in front of a massive Rothko colour field work, trying to "get" what he was doing; well, I got it! Gave me goosebumps.
Seeing art in the flesh and spending time with it really floats my boat. No slide, poster or book can ever come close. So much art, so little time!
What a great question, though. Has me thinking!
Right or wrong, my compulsively analytic brain is wired to look at artistic innovation/trends/styles/ways of seeing and place it within the artist's current social/political/technological contexts, so I'd say the former is true for me personally. I tend to try to ask "why" the person created what they did, who their contemporaries were, etc. Of course, within that parameter, I have my own subjective "favourites" who I feel did it "best." ;)