i love his art,comes from the soul,he whent 3 years without a drink when he did his best work,but he did have help on his way,as i allways say,not what you know but who you know in the world of art.
i feel its kinda ridiculous how they interpret the painting. violent like a boxing match and yet lyrical like a ballet? just shows anyone can interpret it in anyway they like. dont think there really is an intention in spilling paint all over the place
No entiendo como esta clase de pintura llegó a ser importante, para mí es basura de un borracho loco que mató a su mujer y se mató a él mismo. Se burló de todo el mundo con esta espontaneidad bacía y sin significado.
I did the same style of paint that he did and I just threw a bunch of paint of to a canvas, but with every chaotic swing of the brush I felt like there was purpose fir what I was doing and in the end I had made something that I felt good about, his paintings came from within and while we can try and recreate his works we can never truly do it because our subconscious minds are all different.
I guess in the 50s no one else painted like this so it was his art. And the jazz music was what he himself listened to. I would have liked to be a painter in the 50s! It looks like fun to me.
I cant believe it.. a poor and unnecesary explanation of pollocks work with quiet jazz music behind, this paintings doesnt have the secuence of the classical dance, they only could have the secuence of dropping bombs! Excuse my bad english
@84singularity sorry i dont speak to much english is hard to me express myself and i just use a simple phrase for what u are saying . im in pro of expression and i apreciate the work this dude made, not as the other coments i read
how many stupid comments here ... everyone thinks - well I can slop paint on canvas like him ... but this is not the most important here, more important is who was one of the first artists who noticed that even in the chaos you can find beauty ! Who thinks that this is not art I will tell him that only one of his paintings - number 5 was sold for 140 million dollars which is not the most important criterion but still 140 mil ;}
Pollock was an artist all right. A con-artist that is!
All he did was splatter paint over a canvas and claim money for it, but before he could collect his millions of dollars he had to give a deep and thoughtful meaning (which he made up as he went along) to his picture and anyone who didn't see it must have been stupid and didn't know anything about fine art.
@MegaPeacockman: I'm not a huge fan of Pollock myself but to say, ''All he did was splatter paint over a canvas'' is simply wrong. Ever looked at his earlier work?
@MegaPeacockman dude that's fucking right, i can do it too, paint something abstract, lines and dots, then give it a meaning, the very first thing that crosses my head, and then, get bills for that ''fine art'', everyone can!
This is not art. It lacks any aesthetic value, it lacks any intellectual value, and it lacks any emotional value. If one believes that this abomination is fine art, then they have proven themselves to be lacking in any taste whatsoever. It makes me laugh when they treat this crap as if it is has value.
Jackson was a pioneer in taking art to a new frontier of abstraction in the action paintings he experimented with to reach his new found images. Before panning his vision, you need to try entering into his world and mindset-going where no artist had been before is the ultimate risk for ridicule but history has given him the recognition from the art world he so richly deserved.
Polluck is decent. I think Rothko is one of the biggest bullshitters of all time. Abstract Expressionism varies, and really I accept the philosophy of the movement. With every form of art there is the bullshitter, unfortunately in the overload of subjective acknowledgment that comes with this particular movement it is too hard to differentiate.
If by living life to the fullest you mean that Pollock drank himself to death, then I suppose he did. A pity it couldn't have happened before he sullied art with his slapdash efforts.
Why these people try to understand or to give explanation to his work??? There's no explanation damn it! He made them because he felt good when he was doing it!
What Pollock teached us was that everybody can do a Pollock painting!
I bet that if he was alive he would be laughing at some critics about his work.
Why these people are trying to understand or to give explanation to his work??? There's no explanation damn it! He made them because he felt good when he was doing it! What he teached us was that everyone of us can do a Pollock painting. You art snobs!
Let me quote my mother's insight upon seeing Jackson Pollock's paintings: "These look like they've been painted by monkeys." That that says everything about the aesthetic of a Jackson Pollock "work". It is lazy "art" safe for consumption by the "experts" within the institutions of the art world. His "art" didn't become famous because it was good, it became famous because someone told Peggy Guggenheim she should like it. I should spit on a Pollock someday. I doubt anybody would notice.
We would not be wrong to burn abstract expressionist paintings. They are a clear indicator of the extreme degradation of art and the abstract expressionist movement as a whole could well be considered the reason why the reputation of art has been sullied among the populace.
What do I see when I look at a Pollock or a Rothko? I see an uncoordinated mess on a canvas, incapable of offending anyone except those who practice figurative art. Abstract expressionism is a shameful refuge for those with no talent. I've stood before a number of Pollocks and felt emptiness with each one. Then I came upon Rembandt's Aristotle Contemplating a Bust of Homer and I was filled with rapture. Pollock poured because his figurative "art" lacked as much life as his poured paintings.
@CorneliusSpunkwater You clearly felt something in front of those Pollocks, otherwise you wouldn't take the time to write so intemperately against them. I imagine you felt as those everything you valued in art was being tossed into the ditch. No mean feat. What's absurd is your position that my own subjective response to Pollock is invalid, reducible to so much snobbish posturing, as though the millions who like modern art have entered a conspiracy. "Art shouldn't have to be a certain way."
@beradification Involuntary man-slaughter isn't murder, and any way it doesn't affect the quality, originality, and art historical importance of his paintings.
Why these people try to understand or to give explanation to his work??? There's no explanation damn it! He mad them because he felt good when he was doing it! You art snobs!
@nicemalzkaffee Why these people try to understand or to give explanation to his work??? There's no explanation damn it! He made them because he felt good when he was doing it!
What Pollock teached us was that everybody can do a Pollock painting!
I bet that if he was alive he would be laughing at some critics about his work.
@ptlofts you are not quite right ... in abstract art is a point where even the creator does not understand what he did, but rather it feels ... this is a gift from God ... ability to have insight into things ... I am an abstract artist and definitely do not agree with the interpretation in this video ... I have my own understanding which will keep for myself
@ptlofts this mark rufcock is a real toss, seeing he gets paid by pollock, if pollock was still alive he,d probably smash him. these so called experts() are well. aggression,lerrical like a belate how to spell it,fine and delecate,extacy,its dence,like a dream,complex space,sounds like jp is kicking the shit out of him and kicks the crap out of any other critic who stands in front of it
he was on E when he made those paintings. Also if they had hip hop and house music back in the early 50's, I wonder what would his art look like. Pollock listening to NERD's Lapdance would make an interesting painting. To be honest I think his work could be created by anyone even little kids, hat off to him though for convincing enough people to consider him an icon, and also one of his paintings sold for shit like 140 million, respect to that. He was a very lucky man.
Jackson Pollocks technique was controlled?.. Ofcourse its not "controlled".. i mean, if you difine control by pouring paint out of a can, you have destroyed the word "controlled".. Just because it is deliberate that you make ugly art, dosnt make it less ugly..
@maksenDK It did indeed destroy the old meaning of "control" in art, but it is controlled in a new way: gravity isn't variable, but fixed, and Pollock used it to fling the paint where he wanted it to. Go and look at a Pollock in person: the way it balances thick and thin, the blotting and spreading of paint into masses and lines, is indeed controlled. There are no wholes in the web, a field of energy that refers back to the gestures that made it, with impressive, even disturbing, physicality.
Technique can be taught, passion, self expression, and originality cannot. Technique is aquired through practise, hard work. and discipline, something that can be acheived, and learned over a period of time. If you look at some of the best break dancers you will realise, that they are not as good as other break dancers technically. They may not be able to do all the most difficult acrobatic moves, but they have soul, passion, and an original style.Some artist have great techniques but lack soul
@fbeg84 A true master makes something very difficult look very easy like childs play to the untrained and undisciplined eye. But to one who knows and perceives what is being done, understand the genius. When you look at the drunken style in kunfu it appears as if the man is just flopping around on the floor randomly with no focus or awareness of what he is doing, yet it is one of the most difficult styles to acheive. Pollack is in full controll of what he is doing it is deliberate, not random.
@Mrsteddyz Your projecting those objects onto the painting: they are not actually there, just as constellations are not actually intended, easily recognizable images of animals but projected constructs. And a painting is an object, so this is not wholly subjective is it?
@skipper2379 agreed, my point that I was trying to make was that you can never know what the artist intended, perhaps some of the recognizable objects I see, are meant to be seen this way, and maybe not, In a lot of my paintings, which are also abstract, I purposely hide things, hoping the viewer will see them, some do not, but see other things that I did not intend at all, If you can't speak directly to the artist, you can never know for sure.
Anybody could learn to paint as the true artistic masters? Anyone can learn to paint like the divine Raphael and Dali? Hardly. On another note, representation is not necessarily the goal, realism is; Dali's masterworks exemplify this.
I have seen Rothko's works a number of times. His blocks are an apt representation of the depth of his creativity. If one truly wants to see amazing layering, one should look at a Rubens, a Rembrandt, or even a Dali. Even Picasso I would recommend over Rothko.
Way to make shit look important. Look at the painting of the greats like Michelangelo and Kamal-ol-Molk and then look at this guy who talks and paints like a retard... the difference in quality is clear.
Charlatan fooled all the pot-heads of the time. Marketing Genius.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Michelangelo can paint like pollock if he wants to, but pollock can't paint like Rembrandt or Michelangelo.
I don't like how pollock thinks he is an artist, he is insulting centuries of fine artistic tradition. Pollock is an innovator, a theorist, NOT a painter in the league of the old masters.
I think Michelangelo painted a Pollock everyday he paonted . It was called his drop cloth. Most people with any sense threw such refuse away. Pollock just figured he could make money by selling it. He and those around him were marketing genius'. That is where his importance lies.
CorneliusSpunkwater your a nazi who doesn't understand modern art. Both Pollock and Rothko have serious chops for making art. Check out their earlier stuff before you vomit out words on youtube. Fucking Nazi.
@gattij1 It sickens me how deluded you are. It takes no skills to toss paint onto a canvas or draw squares. If you can't do what Pollock and Rothko did, you must be a quadriplegic. How dare you act like you're some elite who can see the beauty of fucking scribbles while us philistines, who can't appreciate true talent, prefer to look at painting that can move us emotionally. Too bad sentimentality is a sin in the modern art world.
@gattij1 So You're saying you are an elite? That is what I stated that you dared to do. I don't get it. Did you just say something random because you thought it sounded clever?
I do have a trained eye, and I can safely say that this "art" is the exercise of men who couldn't draw or paint worth a damn. It's a shame that Pollock didn't have his fatal car wreck before his splatters and Rothko didn't kill himself before his blocks. Maybe then we could have been spared eyesores such as theirs and art would not have been dragged into the gutter in which it currently resides.
the basic point of abstract expressionism is to focus on the elemental in art. they avoid illusionism in order to make painting that is about raw feeling rather than formulated craft work, which is what much of realism actually is. Its not that any one school of thought is superior or inferior, but their is definitely many ways to think about art and they're all valid.
@notnamedjones. you are right. being somewhat of an abstract expressionist artist i would say it takes you back to where painting was about passion and emotion and not about who could paint in a certain way the best . Art is about expression oneself. who is to say one is better then the other.
YOU again?! Wow. You're just trolling all over these videos aren't you? You sound just like a famous world leader that railed against "degenerate" art out of a sense of deep resentment and insecurity and jealousy. HE fancied himself an artist too. HE swore he knew "gutter" art when he saw it too. Of course, when he seized power, he stole as much of that "bad" art as he could because he was just a lowly pirate with delusions of grandeur. Are YOU running for office by any chance?
you have got to be kidding...Rothko's works have an amazing layering...they are certainly not just blocks if you actually look at them. Besides it is not that impressive to paint a representation of something...that is something that anybody could learn to do.
@CorneliusSpunkwater Very nasty of you to wish that Pollock and Rothko had died younger than they did. Clearly art hasn't humanized you one bit. And when was the last time you saw a block as flat as a Rothko? "I do have a trained eye"--no, you have a pompous, reactionary, nasty tongue. You should be ashamed, you fucking Hitlerian philistine.
his paintings are not for the untrained eyes.. people who dont know wont see any difference between scribbles done by a kid and his paintings...people who know see the perfect art.
ignorant people speak about not what they know and then stand back not knowing that in the end they have just made themselves look like compleat jackass's and morons to people who actualy know art, and the reasoning behind its diff movments and styles, without pollock, where do u honestly think that the world would be right now? stupid fuckers.
@Kite208 There is no explanation. We, at least I, can talk about art theory for hours - but that will not help you to feel or "understand" Pollock's work.
For a start, try to watch this video more concentrated. :)
He murdered innocents by leaving these vomits of canvas behind to corrupt many excellent artistic minds of future generations. It will take them years to overcome the damaging charlatanism expressed in these paintings. Crap.
Many people can paint like Picasso, Dali, Rothko or Pollock. Many people can write like Kerouac or play guitar like Jimmi Hendrix..thats not the point. These men all achieved a break thru in how we precieve reality, passed it on to us so we can build from them. Jackson Pollock worked very very hard to achieve his break thru.
My 3 year old daughter made the same breakthrough yesterday when she scribbled all over his homework yesterday. I think we will name it "Frustrated Brother in Magic Marker #476". For the bargain price of $6 million it is yours. See how the art market works.
@bottleslingguy "No one has a patent on the effects of paint splattering on canvas." True, but just try doing what Pollock did without it being a blatant rip-off.
"choreographaed on some level of ecstasy". That means he didn't have a fucking clue what he was doing. Lol jk I love Pollock and all abstract expressionism.
What DID he achieve? To make a laughing stock of the entire art world which pays $20,000,000 for a blank canvas with a black dot! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I'm claiming to be the last of the avant-garde painters of the abstract art movement. Pollock provides the means for understanding the enlightenment I witnessed, because it is based on the transcendence from an object based relationship with painting, to where it's understood as an exercise, that integrates the mind / body / spirit / soul. I also witnessed the enlightenment, through the means of the athletic exercise of tennis.
There is this uptight American snobbery about art that is very funny, really. True artists don't give a crap about you or anyone else says about what it means to be an artist. "Anyone can be an artist" means zip. Who cares? The great ones will either emerge and be recognized by history, or simply be compelled to keep doing what they do with passion, intensity and command. Art is created from the gut and the soul. All critical commentary is irrelevant.
Thank you. As a visual artist who sees the world in a certain way (everything is a painting to me) I am always amused by the endless talk about it, mostly from people who don't do it and haven't got a clue about it. In fact, the most "erudite" and most art critics are clueless about the true meaning of art, which is about living your art every second. It's about always being a child; seeing the world with new eyes and never, ever relying on technique. It's a juicy dance of love and joy.
I am happy for you. I truly am. But I don't understand you. Hasn't anyone told your point of view is naive? I am a sculptor, 19, still in school. One critique changed my life two years ago. The professor told me that I was naive. Now I don't know how to grow up...ha. funny.
Years of art "school" have left me far from naive. However, perhaps I am getting back to that place of naivete after all. Thank heavens! Nothing like being naive. It's so...refreshing.
If there is an audience to an expression from the gut and soul then it is difficult to leave it totally out of discussion since creative expression causes reations onto other people.
also because most non americans in the artworld still cant comprhend a good painting about nothing with no subject matter or point of referance but still says something go back to your cubism locked into your little world where the subject is more important than the art itself paint wine bottles and people no one has ever seen those before
im sorry but show me i drip or pour painting by picasso and dalis technique similar to pollock was really just ink drawings used by shrinks to ask clients what they see i highly doubt u know much about pollock other than his drip paintings but he was a painter not locked into any style such as picasso or dali which makes him unique the fact hes famous for doing his drip paintings makes alot of artists jealous cuz he did it first and right the shear balance of the overall paintings
Jenna he has 6 stdy drawings with porvenance and a Lichtenstien 'Brushstroke'stuby, in balck and yellow colored pencil.
If serious look on Kijiji Canada, he is a super fella, with quality blue chip,fuauthenticated works.I knwo he wants the Lichtenstein 'brushstroke drawing' to sell ,orhe sends it to Sothebys in yhe Novemeber /08 Contemp. auctions...
"Change the american art" YEAH RIGHT, THIS STYLE WAS ALREADY DONE BY ANDRE DERAIN AND SALVADOR DALI, INCLUDING PICASSO!!!So, please americans, dont say that Pollock was a good artist!!!He only focused in a certain minimalistic style with certain accident droppings!!!It didint mean nothing, thats why he commited suicide, because he felt that his art was totally fake and with no possible continuation and with no new innovations in terms of experimenting!!!
dude, Pollock was a great artists before going into the "drip" phase, considered by his PEERS at the time to be at the top of his game. And as you know his peers were people not to be fooled by "accidental" droppings. I'll bet you never saw one of his canvases in person,otherwise you could not have that opinion. And without seeing the painting outside of a photo, you cannot give an accurate opinion.........also he is in no way a minimalist.
I don't know where you're from, but what i know is that you're an idiot!!! there's no other comment to say to a guy like you who doesn't know anything about pollock and his art!!!! idiot!!!
Don't be naive dude, lets be honest!!!American government needed artist because U.S.A. became 1st world country during the 50's and so on!!!So, we needed to EXPORT not only coca cola culture, but also we needed to say to the world that we are not totally stupid, and that we also have geniuses like Pollock, Motherwell, Warhol, Rothko etc. Also, thanks to american art, now days there are no more identity in the art market, NOW EVERYBODY IS AN ARTIST!!!
Everybody....REALLY. I know there is a lot of crap out there, but it has nothing to do with the AB-EX's it has to do with idiots like Warhol who proved that anyone could make crappy art.
Totally correct dude,you know when i went to Europe, curators gave us original and logical explanation about the european art. Compare to American Art, curators here say a lot of stupidity with no logical contribution to the public. So,what i am trying to say is that, HERE IN USA, ANYONE CAN BE AN ARTIST, JUST CAME OUT WITH A SCIENTIFIC UNLOGICAL EXPLANATION OF THE WORK AND YOUR TOTALLY AN ARTIST!!!!
i love his art,comes from the soul,he whent 3 years without a drink when he did his best work,but he did have help on his way,as i allways say,not what you know but who you know in the world of art.
mummytumy 1 month ago
i feel its kinda ridiculous how they interpret the painting. violent like a boxing match and yet lyrical like a ballet? just shows anyone can interpret it in anyway they like. dont think there really is an intention in spilling paint all over the place
awaions 4 months ago
That's 140 million dollars if i ever saw it.
scar504 4 months ago
No entiendo como esta clase de pintura llegó a ser importante, para mí es basura de un borracho loco que mató a su mujer y se mató a él mismo. Se burló de todo el mundo con esta espontaneidad bacía y sin significado.
andrester7 6 months ago
Comment removed
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
@MrMikeludo Nar nar nar, nar, nar, nar nar nar.
whoisbbg 6 months ago
@whoisbbg Isn't it.
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
I did the same style of paint that he did and I just threw a bunch of paint of to a canvas, but with every chaotic swing of the brush I felt like there was purpose fir what I was doing and in the end I had made something that I felt good about, his paintings came from within and while we can try and recreate his works we can never truly do it because our subconscious minds are all different.
skinnyman1423 8 months ago
I guess in the 50s no one else painted like this so it was his art. And the jazz music was what he himself listened to. I would have liked to be a painter in the 50s! It looks like fun to me.
karen608608 8 months ago
just looks like splatter shit that someone depressed would do
Trollingwithmyhomies 9 months ago
great painter, but i feel bad for the young girl slain by his hand :( rip
ogbudsone 10 months ago
I cant believe it.. a poor and unnecesary explanation of pollocks work with quiet jazz music behind, this paintings doesnt have the secuence of the classical dance, they only could have the secuence of dropping bombs! Excuse my bad english
MAM18 10 months ago 2
that guy explaining it just seems very stupid to me.
TheRockandroy 10 months ago
Choreograph this, delusional fool.
cosg9531 11 months ago
Like a dream!! That guy must have fucked up demons in his dreams!!! o.O
Re1Mu2R3 11 months ago
Cons, anyway.
DoctorLawyerWhatever 11 months ago
1:15 they spelled his name "Jackson Pollack"
xXAndyxX4yputube 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Abstract expressionists are so delusional.
macarthur19 1 year ago
what you pay for is not the paint...is what is in his head
schuttz1 1 year ago
@schuttz1 and what is in his head is in paint ... next time think before comment ;}
84singularity 1 year ago
@84singularity sorry i dont speak to much english is hard to me express myself and i just use a simple phrase for what u are saying . im in pro of expression and i apreciate the work this dude made, not as the other coments i read
schuttz1 1 year ago
how many stupid comments here ... everyone thinks - well I can slop paint on canvas like him ... but this is not the most important here, more important is who was one of the first artists who noticed that even in the chaos you can find beauty ! Who thinks that this is not art I will tell him that only one of his paintings - number 5 was sold for 140 million dollars which is not the most important criterion but still 140 mil ;}
84singularity 1 year ago
You guys are all fucking mental.
Pollock was an artist all right. A con-artist that is!
All he did was splatter paint over a canvas and claim money for it, but before he could collect his millions of dollars he had to give a deep and thoughtful meaning (which he made up as he went along) to his picture and anyone who didn't see it must have been stupid and didn't know anything about fine art.
Just like in The Emperor's New Clothes.
MegaPeacockman 1 year ago 2
@MegaPeacockman: I'm not a huge fan of Pollock myself but to say, ''All he did was splatter paint over a canvas'' is simply wrong. Ever looked at his earlier work?
GoldenRatio2 1 year ago
@MegaPeacockman dude that's fucking right, i can do it too, paint something abstract, lines and dots, then give it a meaning, the very first thing that crosses my head, and then, get bills for that ''fine art'', everyone can!
TheLaughingMan0603 7 months ago
@TheLaughingMan0603 Then do it and prove you can make money doing it. I guarantee you won't.
tf2weekly 6 months ago
@tf2weekly only for your expectation? bye bye.
TheLaughingMan0603 6 months ago
@tf2weekly Niether did Pollock.
mikemedal 4 months ago
O dat music!
seethevolcane 1 year ago
So much fun in some of posts hahaha...
exalism 1 year ago
Comment removed
exalism 1 year ago
This is not art. It lacks any aesthetic value, it lacks any intellectual value, and it lacks any emotional value. If one believes that this abomination is fine art, then they have proven themselves to be lacking in any taste whatsoever. It makes me laugh when they treat this crap as if it is has value.
Johannes999999999 1 year ago
Jackson was a pioneer in taking art to a new frontier of abstraction in the action paintings he experimented with to reach his new found images. Before panning his vision, you need to try entering into his world and mindset-going where no artist had been before is the ultimate risk for ridicule but history has given him the recognition from the art world he so richly deserved.
dahtyelcsw 1 year ago
the music is so patheticly put to this film... jesus
joebassplayer 1 year ago
Polluck is decent. I think Rothko is one of the biggest bullshitters of all time. Abstract Expressionism varies, and really I accept the philosophy of the movement. With every form of art there is the bullshitter, unfortunately in the overload of subjective acknowledgment that comes with this particular movement it is too hard to differentiate.
SuperProstitution 1 year ago
Yes it is everything you see and don't
johnjacopelleartistgallery
jaco2627 1 year ago
Yes it is everything you see and don't
jaco2627 1 year ago
i tried to do this shit
it looks easy.
takes a lot of skill
DoomCity202 1 year ago
Yo uwanna know the truth? Art is in the eyes of who's watching it!
ptlofts 1 year ago
If by living life to the fullest you mean that Pollock drank himself to death, then I suppose he did. A pity it couldn't have happened before he sullied art with his slapdash efforts.
CorneliusSpunkwater 1 year ago
@CorneliusSpunkwater no coments...
ptlofts 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why these people try to understand or to give explanation to his work??? There's no explanation damn it! He made them because he felt good when he was doing it!
What Pollock teached us was that everybody can do a Pollock painting!
I bet that if he was alive he would be laughing at some critics about his work.
You art snobs!
ptlofts 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why these people are trying to understand or to give explanation to his work??? There's no explanation damn it! He made them because he felt good when he was doing it! What he teached us was that everyone of us can do a Pollock painting. You art snobs!
ptlofts 1 year ago
Let me quote my mother's insight upon seeing Jackson Pollock's paintings: "These look like they've been painted by monkeys." That that says everything about the aesthetic of a Jackson Pollock "work". It is lazy "art" safe for consumption by the "experts" within the institutions of the art world. His "art" didn't become famous because it was good, it became famous because someone told Peggy Guggenheim she should like it. I should spit on a Pollock someday. I doubt anybody would notice.
CorneliusSpunkwater 1 year ago
@CorneliusSpunkwater
poor u ..still dont understand anything
nicemalzkaffee 1 year ago
We would not be wrong to burn abstract expressionist paintings. They are a clear indicator of the extreme degradation of art and the abstract expressionist movement as a whole could well be considered the reason why the reputation of art has been sullied among the populace.
CorneliusSpunkwater 1 year ago
@CorneliusSpunkwater well said
beradification 1 year ago
What do I see when I look at a Pollock or a Rothko? I see an uncoordinated mess on a canvas, incapable of offending anyone except those who practice figurative art. Abstract expressionism is a shameful refuge for those with no talent. I've stood before a number of Pollocks and felt emptiness with each one. Then I came upon Rembandt's Aristotle Contemplating a Bust of Homer and I was filled with rapture. Pollock poured because his figurative "art" lacked as much life as his poured paintings.
CorneliusSpunkwater 1 year ago
@CorneliusSpunkwater You clearly felt something in front of those Pollocks, otherwise you wouldn't take the time to write so intemperately against them. I imagine you felt as those everything you valued in art was being tossed into the ditch. No mean feat. What's absurd is your position that my own subjective response to Pollock is invalid, reducible to so much snobbish posturing, as though the millions who like modern art have entered a conspiracy. "Art shouldn't have to be a certain way."
skipper2379 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Jackson Pollock and/or Mark Rothko and their work can be found in the following important books:
New York School Abstract Expressionists Artists Choice by Artists
ISBN: 0967799406
American Abstract Expressionism of the 1950s An Illustrated Survey ISBN:0967799414;
American Abstract and Figurative Expressionism Style is Timely Art is Timeless ISBN:096779922Exhibition
American Abstract Expressionism of the 1950s An Illustrated Survey ISBN:0967799414
lolipuf 1 year ago
pollack was a murderer.
beradification 1 year ago
@beradification Involuntary man-slaughter isn't murder, and any way it doesn't affect the quality, originality, and art historical importance of his paintings.
skipper2379 1 year ago
@skipper2379 You're right, they still suck.
socer777 1 year ago
Somebody have to shout "The emperor have no cloths".
this is not art but pure garbage.
yoheff988 1 year ago
i hate when people try to put this extreme level of meaning in a piece of art , just let it be
TheDogod 1 year ago
Why these people try to understand or to give explanation to his work??? There's no explanation damn it! He mad them because he felt good when he was doing it! You art snobs!
ptlofts 1 year ago 19
@ptlofts
u got it....
nicemalzkaffee 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nicemalzkaffee Why these people try to understand or to give explanation to his work??? There's no explanation damn it! He made them because he felt good when he was doing it!
What Pollock teached us was that everybody can do a Pollock painting!
I bet that if he was alive he would be laughing at some critics about his work.
You art snobs!
ptlofts 1 year ago
@ptlofts you are not quite right ... in abstract art is a point where even the creator does not understand what he did, but rather it feels ... this is a gift from God ... ability to have insight into things ... I am an abstract artist and definitely do not agree with the interpretation in this video ... I have my own understanding which will keep for myself
84singularity 1 year ago
@84singularity You are right, it is a feeling, it is a natural flow and a subconscious alchemical process.
i find it really driving you to something unknown therefore something interesting and exciting.
honestly you can only judge abstract art if you understand the relationship of emotions and expression.
NoiNoki 1 year ago
@NoiNoki and what's useful about judging art?
TheRockandroy 10 months ago
@ptlofts this mark rufcock is a real toss, seeing he gets paid by pollock, if pollock was still alive he,d probably smash him. these so called experts() are well. aggression,lerrical like a belate how to spell it,fine and delecate,extacy,its dence,like a dream,complex space,sounds like jp is kicking the shit out of him and kicks the crap out of any other critic who stands in front of it
gregthpeg 11 months ago
@ptlofts I think he wanted everyone to find their own meaning in his work.
skinnyman1423 8 months ago
he was on E when he made those paintings. Also if they had hip hop and house music back in the early 50's, I wonder what would his art look like. Pollock listening to NERD's Lapdance would make an interesting painting. To be honest I think his work could be created by anyone even little kids, hat off to him though for convincing enough people to consider him an icon, and also one of his paintings sold for shit like 140 million, respect to that. He was a very lucky man.
MultiBrunolucas 1 year ago
Jackson Pollocks technique was controlled?.. Ofcourse its not "controlled".. i mean, if you difine control by pouring paint out of a can, you have destroyed the word "controlled".. Just because it is deliberate that you make ugly art, dosnt make it less ugly..
maksenDK 1 year ago
@maksenDK It did indeed destroy the old meaning of "control" in art, but it is controlled in a new way: gravity isn't variable, but fixed, and Pollock used it to fling the paint where he wanted it to. Go and look at a Pollock in person: the way it balances thick and thin, the blotting and spreading of paint into masses and lines, is indeed controlled. There are no wholes in the web, a field of energy that refers back to the gestures that made it, with impressive, even disturbing, physicality.
skipper2379 1 year ago
Technique can be taught, passion, self expression, and originality cannot. Technique is aquired through practise, hard work. and discipline, something that can be acheived, and learned over a period of time. If you look at some of the best break dancers you will realise, that they are not as good as other break dancers technically. They may not be able to do all the most difficult acrobatic moves, but they have soul, passion, and an original style.Some artist have great techniques but lack soul
fbeg84 1 year ago
@fbeg84 A true master makes something very difficult look very easy like childs play to the untrained and undisciplined eye. But to one who knows and perceives what is being done, understand the genius. When you look at the drunken style in kunfu it appears as if the man is just flopping around on the floor randomly with no focus or awareness of what he is doing, yet it is one of the most difficult styles to acheive. Pollack is in full controll of what he is doing it is deliberate, not random.
fbeg84 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
lol, but what is art? I rather like Jackson Pollocks art myself. I find it quite mathematically aesthetic, and to that end, I find it artistic.
MrUseful93 1 year ago
lol, but what is art? I rather like Jackson Pollocks art myself. I find it quite mathematically aesthetic, and to that end, I find it artistic.
MrUseful93 1 year ago 2
I see tons of recognizable objects, this guys a douche, even I know art is subjective to it's viewer
Mrsteddyz 1 year ago
@Mrsteddyz Your projecting those objects onto the painting: they are not actually there, just as constellations are not actually intended, easily recognizable images of animals but projected constructs. And a painting is an object, so this is not wholly subjective is it?
skipper2379 1 year ago
@skipper2379 agreed, my point that I was trying to make was that you can never know what the artist intended, perhaps some of the recognizable objects I see, are meant to be seen this way, and maybe not, In a lot of my paintings, which are also abstract, I purposely hide things, hoping the viewer will see them, some do not, but see other things that I did not intend at all, If you can't speak directly to the artist, you can never know for sure.
Mrsteddyz 1 year ago
Comment removed
VasilisBotoulas 1 year ago
Anybody could learn to paint as the true artistic masters? Anyone can learn to paint like the divine Raphael and Dali? Hardly. On another note, representation is not necessarily the goal, realism is; Dali's masterworks exemplify this.
I have seen Rothko's works a number of times. His blocks are an apt representation of the depth of his creativity. If one truly wants to see amazing layering, one should look at a Rubens, a Rembrandt, or even a Dali. Even Picasso I would recommend over Rothko.
CorneliusSpunkwater 1 year ago
@CorneliusSpunkwater Hilarious, describing Dali, that great blasphemer, as divine! You must like virtuosic kitsch.
skipper2379 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Goglear Los Mandalas de Kamen
kamenabstracto blogspot com/
Darioleandro2002 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Goglear Los Mandalas de Kamen
kamenabstracto blogspot com/
Darioleandro2002 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Way to make shit look important. Look at the painting of the greats like Michelangelo and Kamal-ol-Molk and then look at this guy who talks and paints like a retard... the difference in quality is clear.
Charlatan fooled all the pot-heads of the time. Marketing Genius.
Arad737 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Michelangelo can paint like pollock if he wants to, but pollock can't paint like Rembrandt or Michelangelo.
I don't like how pollock thinks he is an artist, he is insulting centuries of fine artistic tradition. Pollock is an innovator, a theorist, NOT a painter in the league of the old masters.
solidysnake1 1 year ago
@solidysnake1
there is no evolution of art in history, art is about rupture and reflection of time
Marenqo 1 year ago
@solidysnake1
I think Michelangelo painted a Pollock everyday he paonted . It was called his drop cloth. Most people with any sense threw such refuse away. Pollock just figured he could make money by selling it. He and those around him were marketing genius'. That is where his importance lies.
zappasaurus 1 year ago
@solidysnake1 technique vs. soul man, age old debate
erikishealing 1 year ago
CorneliusSpunkwater your a nazi who doesn't understand modern art. Both Pollock and Rothko have serious chops for making art. Check out their earlier stuff before you vomit out words on youtube. Fucking Nazi.
gattij1 1 year ago
@gattij1 It sickens me how deluded you are. It takes no skills to toss paint onto a canvas or draw squares. If you can't do what Pollock and Rothko did, you must be a quadriplegic. How dare you act like you're some elite who can see the beauty of fucking scribbles while us philistines, who can't appreciate true talent, prefer to look at painting that can move us emotionally. Too bad sentimentality is a sin in the modern art world.
socer777 1 year ago
@socer777 I do in fact dare.
gattij1 1 year ago
@gattij1 So You're saying you are an elite? That is what I stated that you dared to do. I don't get it. Did you just say something random because you thought it sounded clever?
socer777 1 year ago
I do have a trained eye, and I can safely say that this "art" is the exercise of men who couldn't draw or paint worth a damn. It's a shame that Pollock didn't have his fatal car wreck before his splatters and Rothko didn't kill himself before his blocks. Maybe then we could have been spared eyesores such as theirs and art would not have been dragged into the gutter in which it currently resides.
CorneliusSpunkwater 1 year ago
the basic point of abstract expressionism is to focus on the elemental in art. they avoid illusionism in order to make painting that is about raw feeling rather than formulated craft work, which is what much of realism actually is. Its not that any one school of thought is superior or inferior, but their is definitely many ways to think about art and they're all valid.
NotNamedJones 1 year ago 2
@notnamedjones. you are right. being somewhat of an abstract expressionist artist i would say it takes you back to where painting was about passion and emotion and not about who could paint in a certain way the best . Art is about expression oneself. who is to say one is better then the other.
reaper1545 1 year ago
YOU again?! Wow. You're just trolling all over these videos aren't you? You sound just like a famous world leader that railed against "degenerate" art out of a sense of deep resentment and insecurity and jealousy. HE fancied himself an artist too. HE swore he knew "gutter" art when he saw it too. Of course, when he seized power, he stole as much of that "bad" art as he could because he was just a lowly pirate with delusions of grandeur. Are YOU running for office by any chance?
mindstormsabrewin 1 year ago
you have got to be kidding...Rothko's works have an amazing layering...they are certainly not just blocks if you actually look at them. Besides it is not that impressive to paint a representation of something...that is something that anybody could learn to do.
ashyrose87 1 year ago
@CorneliusSpunkwater Very nasty of you to wish that Pollock and Rothko had died younger than they did. Clearly art hasn't humanized you one bit. And when was the last time you saw a block as flat as a Rothko? "I do have a trained eye"--no, you have a pompous, reactionary, nasty tongue. You should be ashamed, you fucking Hitlerian philistine.
skipper2379 1 year ago
his paintings are not for the untrained eyes.. people who dont know wont see any difference between scribbles done by a kid and his paintings...people who know see the perfect art.
skijophreniC 1 year ago
ignorant people speak about not what they know and then stand back not knowing that in the end they have just made themselves look like compleat jackass's and morons to people who actualy know art, and the reasoning behind its diff movments and styles, without pollock, where do u honestly think that the world would be right now? stupid fuckers.
bearsdaddyjrspap 1 year ago
Pollock is amazing!! a total original.
edwardm250 1 year ago 8
@edwardm250
Can you tell me why is he amazing?
Kite208 11 months ago
@Kite208 There is no explanation. We, at least I, can talk about art theory for hours - but that will not help you to feel or "understand" Pollock's work.
For a start, try to watch this video more concentrated. :)
BodyHeaven 11 months ago
@BodyHeaven
in other words, its too crappy to understand it or feel it.
Kite208 11 months ago
@Kite208 Great, it seems you found your values for these piece of arts. I am glad you cleared it up. Not everything is for everyone.
BodyHeaven 11 months ago
@BodyHeaven
Your wrong
Beauty is for everyone.
Beauty can be found in every Traditional and Classical Realists arts, thus the Traditional and Classical Realists arts is for everyone.
Kite208 11 months ago
@Kite208 Than, how can you explain how this is beautiful for me? :) Also, I feel nothing in presence of many renaissance paintings. :)
BodyHeaven 11 months ago
@BodyHeaven
because you don't have a soul, that's why you liked this crap.
Kite208 11 months ago
@Kite208 Thank you.
BodyHeaven 11 months ago
Comment removed
edwardm250 1 year ago
Jackson Pollock's art is a big joke.
nerskie 2 years ago
I agree with you. People who say Pollock is amazing are under some serious delusion.
solidysnake1 1 year ago
When Pollock had his drunken car wreck, was he able to murder innocents at the same time, or just himself?
forloveoffilm 2 years ago
He murdered innocents by leaving these vomits of canvas behind to corrupt many excellent artistic minds of future generations. It will take them years to overcome the damaging charlatanism expressed in these paintings. Crap.
zappasaurus 2 years ago
thats gotta be the dumbest most ignorant bullshit I ever heard
caoin45 2 years ago
You wanna see hard work? Read my Mind!
(or a Russians)
AClarke2007 2 years ago
Kirk Varnedoe RIP. The man had great insight into the art (sometimes more than the artist). That's a critic's job.
Joonhollywood 2 years ago
good but everything said here is just opinion and not fact. i think he was a good artist.
tonyrosam 2 years ago
inspirational
ultrasonicart 2 years ago
Love pollock, he ripped the art world a new asshole !!!!!
ravenmoon3 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Perfect example of the cult of celebrity.
Anyone can do this. No one has a patent on the effects of paint splattering on canvas.
bottleslingguy 2 years ago
Many people can paint like Picasso, Dali, Rothko or Pollock. Many people can write like Kerouac or play guitar like Jimmi Hendrix..thats not the point. These men all achieved a break thru in how we precieve reality, passed it on to us so we can build from them. Jackson Pollock worked very very hard to achieve his break thru.
mcnowski 2 years ago 2
true
bottleslingguy 2 years ago
You wanna see hard work? Go talk to the house painters that do this everyday and then clean it up when they're done.
aswtx75 2 years ago
obviously you are not seeing the difference between creativity and manual labour.
mcnowski 2 years ago 2
mcnowski
My 3 year old daughter made the same breakthrough yesterday when she scribbled all over his homework yesterday. I think we will name it "Frustrated Brother in Magic Marker #476". For the bargain price of $6 million it is yours. See how the art market works.
zappasaurus 2 years ago
perfect example of ignorance. No one can do this because Pollock has done it.
johndennny 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@bottleslingguy "No one has a patent on the effects of paint splattering on canvas." True, but just try doing what Pollock did without it being a blatant rip-off.
skipper2379 1 year ago
"choreographaed on some level of ecstasy". That means he didn't have a fucking clue what he was doing. Lol jk I love Pollock and all abstract expressionism.
NecroButcher91 2 years ago
"Lyrical, like a ballet" HAHAHAHAHA Pollock laughs from his grave.
It`s his guts,blood, bile, puke, shit & piss on the canvas. These suits are insane....funny tho.
bagoona 2 years ago
Jackson Pollock & Mark Rothco
Perhaps One Wants To Tinker With Ancient
Geometry?
Precisely what i was thinkingray in Hand
SV5 Rolling Ball Extra FineRedBallOne
Its All Down Hill From HereRedInk-Two
eye see you I . C . U
just put the pens together.
DoubleDutchBust 2 years ago
NPR
ITS ALL DOWN HILL
JACKSONPOLLOCK
SHOULD I BE CONCERNED AS TO HOO.
Can
Brush
Or Stick
y Just get the paint and canvas.
DoubleDutchBust 2 years ago
I don't know
thebastoon 2 years ago
Pollock made a mockery of art. His stuff before his drip paintings were good, but after that... Pure Garbage!
alleswp 2 years ago
What DID he achieve? To make a laughing stock of the entire art world which pays $20,000,000 for a blank canvas with a black dot! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
judaicaman007 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A monkey could of painted that.
mcwinker 2 years ago
I can't believe he said it was "choreographed." It is nothing, yes. But, I wouldn't say it is at all planned.
baroqueignition 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
☻/
/▌
/ \ cool whip
mittROMNEY666 2 years ago
I'm claiming to be the last of the avant-garde painters of the abstract art movement. Pollock provides the means for understanding the enlightenment I witnessed, because it is based on the transcendence from an object based relationship with painting, to where it's understood as an exercise, that integrates the mind / body / spirit / soul. I also witnessed the enlightenment, through the means of the athletic exercise of tennis.
Big Plate.
Cheers!!!
mindbodyhealer 2 years ago
Actually, you sound more like a knob-head than anything else !
cspace1234nz 2 years ago
Right back at you.
mindbodyhealer 2 years ago
I thought you would like that !
cspace1234nz 2 years ago
A wise man does not claim to be wise...
TRANSiENTART 2 years ago
Pseudo-profundity
tellyisrubbish 2 years ago
see "rothko generator"
rfromberg 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Mmm, yea, Aah, interesting"
What the hell, it looks like a blotch of shit.
Can I be a painter too?
McWalker25 2 years ago
maybe a house painter...? you still have to learn a lot...
DoczyKriszta 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
if i wanked on a bit of paper i could call it pollock.
warhohl is great
this dickhead's a tosser
darkmarkrammstein 2 years ago
muuuyy grandee :-)
rodrigomartin86 2 years ago
There is this uptight American snobbery about art that is very funny, really. True artists don't give a crap about you or anyone else says about what it means to be an artist. "Anyone can be an artist" means zip. Who cares? The great ones will either emerge and be recognized by history, or simply be compelled to keep doing what they do with passion, intensity and command. Art is created from the gut and the soul. All critical commentary is irrelevant.
XOMartha44 3 years ago 29
^the truth! ^
chandru1103 2 years ago
Thank you. As a visual artist who sees the world in a certain way (everything is a painting to me) I am always amused by the endless talk about it, mostly from people who don't do it and haven't got a clue about it. In fact, the most "erudite" and most art critics are clueless about the true meaning of art, which is about living your art every second. It's about always being a child; seeing the world with new eyes and never, ever relying on technique. It's a juicy dance of love and joy.
XOMartha44 2 years ago 2
I am happy for you. I truly am. But I don't understand you. Hasn't anyone told your point of view is naive? I am a sculptor, 19, still in school. One critique changed my life two years ago. The professor told me that I was naive. Now I don't know how to grow up...ha. funny.
jessucasoup89 2 years ago
Years of art "school" have left me far from naive. However, perhaps I am getting back to that place of naivete after all. Thank heavens! Nothing like being naive. It's so...refreshing.
XOMartha44 2 years ago
@XOMartha44 This applies not only to men, but to monkeys too.
shadowkunt 1 year ago
@XOMartha44
If there is an audience to an expression from the gut and soul then it is difficult to leave it totally out of discussion since creative expression causes reations onto other people.
hallstromfineart 1 year ago
@XOMartha44
agreed
jws54 1 year ago
@XOMartha44 Amen brother!
VasilisBotoulas 1 year ago
@XOMartha44 Speaking of snobbery, talk of "true artists" is the height of elitism.
And I'm an American, here ;)
trylonperisphere 1 year ago
@XOMartha44 I like your comment,sincerely, except doesn't the last sentence mean your comment is irrelevant too.
beradification 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hack like Warhol.
uncleadolf 3 years ago
That's a bit of a twist as you list Warhol in your favourites...
Gnarled kicks out of baiting the vacuous, huh?
Me too!
MintySpunkBubble 2 years ago
whaaaat haappens isssss GOD no mayttter
stixla191 3 years ago
Great artist.
nicolatwo 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
pile of shit!
gardenofarcane 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i agree this is some huge piles of shit spread all over.
artrenewal . o r g
Rugiviet 3 years ago
also because most non americans in the artworld still cant comprhend a good painting about nothing with no subject matter or point of referance but still says something go back to your cubism locked into your little world where the subject is more important than the art itself paint wine bottles and people no one has ever seen those before
Speedofsmell 3 years ago
im sorry but show me i drip or pour painting by picasso and dalis technique similar to pollock was really just ink drawings used by shrinks to ask clients what they see i highly doubt u know much about pollock other than his drip paintings but he was a painter not locked into any style such as picasso or dali which makes him unique the fact hes famous for doing his drip paintings makes alot of artists jealous cuz he did it first and right the shear balance of the overall paintings
Speedofsmell 3 years ago
@Speedofsmell Picasso was hardly locked into a single style. He could be a neo-classicist in the morning and a cubist in the afternoon.
skipper2379 1 year ago
Jenna he has 6 stdy drawings with porvenance and a Lichtenstien 'Brushstroke'stuby, in balck and yellow colored pencil.
If serious look on Kijiji Canada, he is a super fella, with quality blue chip,fuauthenticated works.I knwo he wants the Lichtenstein 'brushstroke drawing' to sell ,orhe sends it to Sothebys in yhe Novemeber /08 Contemp. auctions...
B.O.L.
J
repelghosts 3 years ago
"Change the american art" YEAH RIGHT, THIS STYLE WAS ALREADY DONE BY ANDRE DERAIN AND SALVADOR DALI, INCLUDING PICASSO!!!So, please americans, dont say that Pollock was a good artist!!!He only focused in a certain minimalistic style with certain accident droppings!!!It didint mean nothing, thats why he commited suicide, because he felt that his art was totally fake and with no possible continuation and with no new innovations in terms of experimenting!!!
rictit 3 years ago
dude, Pollock was a great artists before going into the "drip" phase, considered by his PEERS at the time to be at the top of his game. And as you know his peers were people not to be fooled by "accidental" droppings. I'll bet you never saw one of his canvases in person,otherwise you could not have that opinion. And without seeing the painting outside of a photo, you cannot give an accurate opinion.........also he is in no way a minimalist.
numbard 3 years ago
I don't know where you're from, but what i know is that you're an idiot!!! there's no other comment to say to a guy like you who doesn't know anything about pollock and his art!!!! idiot!!!
karlile0507 3 years ago
Don't be naive dude, lets be honest!!!American government needed artist because U.S.A. became 1st world country during the 50's and so on!!!So, we needed to EXPORT not only coca cola culture, but also we needed to say to the world that we are not totally stupid, and that we also have geniuses like Pollock, Motherwell, Warhol, Rothko etc. Also, thanks to american art, now days there are no more identity in the art market, NOW EVERYBODY IS AN ARTIST!!!
rictit 3 years ago
Everybody....REALLY. I know there is a lot of crap out there, but it has nothing to do with the AB-EX's it has to do with idiots like Warhol who proved that anyone could make crappy art.
jeffreycollins 3 years ago
did he say pollAck?????
mz55122 3 years ago
blah blah blah blah blah...
oh the curator's point of view... zZzZzZzZzZ
armyofmeisbliss 3 years ago 2
this video is completely worthless
otacon451 3 years ago
Totally correct dude,you know when i went to Europe, curators gave us original and logical explanation about the european art. Compare to American Art, curators here say a lot of stupidity with no logical contribution to the public. So,what i am trying to say is that, HERE IN USA, ANYONE CAN BE AN ARTIST, JUST CAME OUT WITH A SCIENTIFIC UNLOGICAL EXPLANATION OF THE WORK AND YOUR TOTALLY AN ARTIST!!!!
rictit 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I just came home from a bar and im really drunk.. hit me up on my site..{ meetyourfling } DOT com
joaquin
86535
NinaBottone 3 years ago