Hypothetically....Would anyone notice if I added one more drop of paint to the surface of a Jackson Pollock painting? I don't think so (Not that I would ever do this). I was pondering this question today and I decided to make this work. There are a lot of people that I respect, that love the work of Jackson Pollock. Quite honestly, I am not one of them. I have stared at the Pollacks in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York for hours on end and forced myself to like him (for many years). But now that sillyness is over! Aesthetically, Pollock is, "not in the same ballpark" as a Rembrandt or a Caravaggio, regardless of difference of style. There is a strange and beautiful aura to great paintings. Perhaps I don't tune in to that with a Pollock because I can't get over the fact that it looks like I fed a pigeon an Alka Seltzer! BOOM! POLLACK!
This is how I see it (Feel free to blast me if you disagree. and I DO expect some hatemail for this one): The cliche, "Timing is everything" is appropriate with Pollock because he DID think of a new way to paint in an era simultaneous with a boom (of growth) in Mass Media (Printing advances and to a lesser extent, television). Art critics (who were more prominent in Pollock's Era) were searching for an unique American style of painting and Pollock, due to his unconventional and controversial approach, became iconic. Many hated Pollock's work, but media coverage is not about love or hate, but controversy (Marcel DuChamps "Fountain" would have just been a URINAL if it wasn't brought to the worlds attention by the press).
I am a cynic.... and I TRULY believe that Pollock was sincere about the way that he created art. I think that his process was derived out of honesty and not self promotion. One of Pollock's most famous quotes was, "Every good painter paints what he is." Pollock did do that- it is undeniable. But his method and his mentality became a sensation and a controversy, which made him material for debate. I can appreciate his sincerity and the spiritual and psychological concepts of his work, but I do not dig the aesthetics. Just being honest!
This is how I see it (Feel free to blast me if you disagree. and I DO expect some hatemail for this one): The cliche, "Timing is everything" is appropriate with Pollock because he DID think of a new way to paint in an era simultaneous with a boom (of growth) in Mass Media (Printing advances and to a lesser extent, television). Art critics (who were more prominent in Pollock's Era) were searching for an unique American style of painting and Pollock, due to his unconventional and controversial approach, became iconic. Many hated Pollock's work, but media coverage is not about love or hate, but controversy (Marcel DuChamps "Fountain" would have just been a URINAL if it wasn't brought to the worlds attention by the press).
I am a cynic.... and I TRULY believe that Pollock was sincere about the way that he created art. I think that his process was derived out of honesty and not self promotion. One of Pollock's most famous quotes was, "Every good painter paints what he is." Pollock did do that- it is undeniable. But his method and his mentality became a sensation and a controversy, which made him material for debate. I can appreciate his sincerity and the spiritual and psychological concepts of his work, but I do not dig the aesthetics. Just being honest!
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment