Transcendent and particular

1. Does the yellow sentence in the context below imply "Polcari here describes both the transcendent aspect of art as an imaginative space AND the non-transcendent aspect of art as experience"?

2. Does the long green sentence mean "The Great Depression changed the focus of modernist styles of the arts FROM the optimistic future-oriented magical power of machinery and urban life TO the social reality of the 1930s and a lost but usable past and an uncertain future"?

Context:

the art historian Stephen Polcari writes:

"Mitchell Siporin was a mainstream American artist in the 1930s. A true believer in the social purposes of art, he established himself as a painter of the “people.” With paintings of the American scene, of the Haymarket worker’s riots in Chicago, images of the homeless and subjects derived from social history, Siporin joined others in defining the imaginative space of the 1930s as pride in, and protest against, American life. By 1951 that imaginative space was gone. Instead it was an art of inwardness—virtually abstract canvases of dreamy, moody ambiguity and complexity".

Polcari here captures both the transcendent and particular nature of art as experience and imaginative space. The Great Depression restructured and refocused modernist styles in the arts, the optimistic and future-oriented focus on the pulse and magical power of machinery and urban life, with the socially oriented realism of the 1930s, with its focus on a lost but “usable past” and an uncertain future.