Jackson Pollock's work is art. He knew what he was doing when he was making these paintings. You can try to make one like his, but it will probably look terrible unless you're a good artist.
ALL art is nothing more than a form of expression. It is human nature to lash out, point fingers and laugh, hate, make disparaging remarks, all because of that persons failures to understand.
Artist's create for varied reasons that belongs to them only. Their gift to us is their end result.
...what is so wrong with that. Please people, stop the hating. You don't have to like ANYTHING, but, please...keep the negative crap for your on-line gaming friends. I say this because I live an artist life.
@ElizabethEades4112 lol i live in Japan and the museum is in nagoya, called the aichi prefectural museum.
It was truly amazing! they had footage of him work of his death, they had the floor that he worked on all covered in paint and random splashes, the floor itself was a work of art. a lot of paintings of course...quite spectacular, it was my first ever museum, the atmosphere was erie almost.
this con man convinced a lot of idiots he could paint. Good on him for ripping off the idiots of the world. If I could shit on a canvas and sell it for a million I would.
Why the vitriol ? That's Art folks! some you love, some you hate, a more subjective world i know not, beauty really is in the eye of the beholder.....................
Seeing 20 works together made me understand why Pollock was such a great artist. Some of them made me think of Miro.It is such an array of styles that surprised me. He is not just the dribble man.
@mcerion it is appropriate if you think of the spirit of abstract expressionism, which is an invitation for reflection on the part of the viewer. if you are moved by Pollock's work and you hear "Iris" in your mind, then its perfectly fine to do so.
@hakkujin The main difference between your 2 year old and Jackson Pollock is that he did it more than 50 years ago when no one ever did anything like that before.
It's easy to say things like "I can do that" or in your case " My two year old does the exact same thing with her finger-paints" ... but in reality try taking a blank piece of canvas/paper/panel and make something out of it without trying to copy what someone has done before and come up with a whole new visual language.
@Grandizer33 I'm not hating, I'm just being realistic. If Jackson Pollock did ever a painting that proved he had a knowledge of horizon or shading or even a sketch, I would feel differently. Before Picasso moved along to cubism, he proved that he could paint a traditional painting. He did a self portrait and "First Communion" among others. Dali was abstract, but there were images and his images were amazing. Pollack just threw paint on a canvas. He never showed us that he can even draw a flower.
@hakkujin Actually he studied with Regionalist painter Thomas Hart Benton at the Art Students' League in New York. In the 1930s his work was very Regionalists like and he was also influenced by the Mexican muralist painters. The focus of Regionalists art is to create scenes of rural life and it is like traditional painting with lanscapes and figures. In the mid 1940s he changed his style to abstract painting which lead to the drip style that he is famous for.
@Grandizer33 Ah! you are trying to say that he was the first to randomly trow paint to a canvas? Seriously? This guy was the first to be shameless enough to present this oax has ART. There is no talent whatsoever here. All the rest are people giving their own impressions about a meaningless thing. Any painter can do what he does. Can he do what real painters do? NO he can't.
@GabKoost Of course he can do what "real painters" do and he used to do that kind of artwork. But he decided to do something different. Since there is no talent here and any painter can do what he does. I would like to challenge you and would like to see if you can do what he does since it takes no talent. Please make a painting like Jackson Pollock and posted it up. I would like to see what a no talented person like you can do. Either do the challenge and prove me wrong or stop complaining.
@GabKoost Of course he can do what "real painters" do and he used to do that kind of artwork. But he decided to do something different. Since there is no talent here and any painter can do what he does. I would like to challenge you and would like to see if you can do what he does since it takes no talent. Please make a painting like Jackson Pollock and posted it up. I would like to see what a no talented person like you can do. Either do the challenge and prove me wrong or stop complaining.
@masonkim7 i agree. it's a beautiful song, but still seems a bit too mainstream for a video focusing on such an unconventional free-thinking individual.
So, suppose you are one of the people who can experience Mozart - pure beauty, and replicate it pictorially. But the world has become brainwashed, and affected, into being only capable of believing, or understanding, what the worldly power mongers have brainwashed them into believing? Would you not be upset? Would you not be enraged?Yes, if you spent 20 years developing the ability to replicate Mozart, and the world has become conned into believing that it is 'just that easy,' you would be.
@MrMikeludo Beauty can be created without painstaking labor. Thelonious Monk, Jimi Hendrix, Sonic Youth, even Mozart and Beethoven are all known for improvisational prowess. Mozart's improv is the same as Pollock's painting, throwing some fingers at a piano. Are we both feeble minded fools, brainwashed (for no logical reason) by power mongers, to believe Mozart is beautiful?
P.S. Through what sort of crazy Wile E. Coyote scheme could one derive power from brainwashing the art community?
@chilipeppers91 You're kidding, right?The definition of power is money, Or, a person, or group, having control over others - to get money. It's the sweetest scheme in the history of the world: A guy says to another guy; 'you throw some paint on a canvas, I'll convince the world you're a genius, and we'll split 100 mil.' Bach said:'I have worked hard. Anyone who works as hard will go as far.' Mozart said the same. Scientists now say it takes 10 thousand hours for anyone to become a master...
@chilipeppers91 in any endeavor. The scientific fact is Pollock is not music - in any form. Music IS defined 3-dimensional fundamental frequency modulations, not 2-dimensional color. The definition of 'color,' is: 'one of the physical attributes of mass' - pure mass. You see, your words contradict your sentiment. Yes a cloud is beautiful, so is a tree, and a brook. Except, Pollock didn't paint a cloud, a tree, or a brook. He painted nothing, defined nothing. Moreover, why would anyone pay some..
@chilipeppers91 money to see a picture of a cloud, a tree, or a brook, when they could go outside and see a real cloud -tree and brook. They wouldn't. But Mozart created something extraordinarily unique. Something that you can not simply hear outside. that's why 200 years ago people would pay money to be let inside to hear Mozart. Because his music is exactly 'different' than random noise. So, why would someone pay some money to see a picture of random noise: Pollock, when you can see random...
@chilipeppers91 noise outside in reality. You wouldn't. The answear is; 'Confusing the map with the territory.' Music can induce a varity of biochemicals: serotonin and endorphins, which require a cognitive capability to experience.There is another biochemical:dopamine. Dopamine is 'sex' and almost everything else, including musical sounds and 'color': 'Pollock's color.' Except, cognitively, Pollock's picturs are defined noise.So, if a person employes there intelligence when looking at Pollock..
@chilipeppers91 there mind will percieve 'noise,' and cause them to move in a direction away from Pollock's pictures. Of course there should exist 'sex': 'color,' in society, but there should also exist the defined pinnacle antithesis: Mozart - the literally defined pinnacle of uniquely humanistic cognitive capabilities. The 'sex' belongs in the brothels, and not in a 'museum.'Do you believe we should have a society where there exists nothing but sex, well look around. Intelligent people don't.
@MrMikeludo I contend that Mozart and his father were also conmen. The young Amadeus would arbitrarily throw random notes together and his father would tell everyone that it was magnificent, and all the more impressive because of his young age. The concert hall operators realized they could make a killing off of this pathetic gimmick, so they aided in convincing the simpletons that he was a genius. The brainwashing was so effective that people still think Mozart was competent. True story.
@chilipeppers91 That is literally insane. Human beings do not invent the laws of harmonic functions, we learn them. But they exist a priori. Take a string, stretch it to a certain length, pluck the string - effect a note. Half the length, pluck it again, and effect a note an octave above the previous: fact - science- nature. Mozart's music contains a very complex syntax - or structure, which is also a reflection of reality. It is the function of geometrical equations. Science now confirms the...
@chilipeppers91 fact that this syntax is both a reflection of reality and the definition of intelligence:"The equivalent of the machine language of the brain is very complex field configurations - the mind of man contains only so many visions; four recurrent geometrical forms - Life is patterns in space/time (not) physical things - consciousness is a space/time manifold - Einstein replaced Newton's space with a network of light beams."Again, this is the exact reason for the analogy and the con..
@chilipeppers91 This is 'why' people say Pollock - or anyone else, is 'like Mozart.' Mozart learned how to 'arrange' the building blocks: notes, in a manner that no one else could: 'COULD.' Which is what made him Mozart, and a defined genius. The fact is anyone can: 'CAN,' do exactly what Pollock did, and millions do every day: when they paint a room. Here's a question: if you are so anxious to actually see the literally defined equivalent of Mozart - and/or any visual music, why don't you...
@chilipeppers91 let me explain it for you and tell you where you can actually see one: belonging to Leonardo da Vinci. The usual reason, and the reason for the 'art' community relunctance, is because it requires 'work' to actually experience it. You see, that is the reason for the con. I mean there does actually exist one: literal visual musical equivalent, but it requires work to experience it: They - the 'art' community, don't want to have to do any work, they just want all the glory.
@chilipeppers91 And that is the exact reason that the rich pay 160 mil for a Pollock - a picture of pure pictorial gibberish. Because, they simply do not want to admit that they spent their lives doing nothing except trying to make as much money as they can. Then, after they realize their lives are meaningless they buy a 'Pollock' - tell the world they are geniuses, and give their misreable lives some credence. But that is also exactly why they would never admit they are wrong, how about you?
@tf2weekly Where - anywhere, is this dialogue, did I say I consider myself to be a genius, or even express an 'opinion' about anything? You must be one of those people who owns no mirrors, but only the reflection which you choose to see: You are someome who stands in front of Pollock - defined nonsensical gibberish, and claims: "I can 'see' genius here - in this vague cacophony of crap, ergo I too am a genius": critic.
@MrMikeludo are you retarded bro??? i just read all of your comments and you're a fuckin idiot. normally id type out a well thought out comment to someone like you, but you're not even worth it. you said "where did i consider myself a genius, or even express an 'opinion' about anything?" are you retarded??? all of your comments were about how 'untalented' pollock is. and you DO consider yourself a genius because you critique someone who made it in the industry, unlike your poor self
@JoeJonesMusic I'm all ears. Beings you consider yourself to be such a brilliant debater, find some type of substantive information, devoid of a simpleminded socio-political automoton opinion, present it in an intelligent manner: "retarded bro," and I will gladly consider it. I am holding my breadth, as I can't wait for your sophistic, closeminded, claptrap rambling.
@MrMikeludo if you consider me liking jackson pollock to be the opinion of a "socio-political automoton". you really ARE retarded. NO ONE KNOWS WHO HE IS!!! some people can't even tell you who Picasso is! call me simpleminded? I know a little bit about everything. I think it is YOU, who is truly simple minded. wasting countless hours upon the internetz complaining about the opinion that other people are allowed to have. you're probably a christian. ya...i just went there....
@JoeJonesMusic Boy, that really is some substantive information right there. Have you ever even read a book? Keep flapping those arms, you'll get to Planet Zircon eventually.
@MrMikeludo If you could divulge one sole reason why I should have to substantiate myself to such an idiotic lack of a being on the internet, I will gladly elicit some substantiated information for you; however, I see no need as it is YOU, who should truly have to present some substantive information. You're the one sitting behind your keyboard hating on a DECEASED MAN! A MAN WHO'S NOT EVEN ALIVE TO DEFEND HIMSELF!
@MrMikeludo@MrMikeludo If you could divulge one sole reason why I should have to substantiate myself to such an idiotic lack of a being on the internet, I will gladly elicit some substantiated information for you; however, I see no need as it is YOU, who should truly have to present some substantive information. You're the one sitting behind your keyboard hating on a DECEASED MAN! A MAN WHO'S NOT EVEN ALIVE TO DEFEND HIMSELF!
@MrMikeludo and by "Christians," I mean mindless inbreeds who walk around aimlessly believing in a fake handbook that contains commands to do (much like a dog) and ravish all those who do not agree with their opinion, much like what you are doing right now
@MrMikeludo And foremost, you're hating on a man with more talent than you could even dream within a dream of having. Those who can't do teach. Those who can't teach talk shit on the internet about people who are dear and immensely talented. You're simply a walking, nameless being who's going to die with a shallow grave and a blank epitaph. People like you don't deserve the internet. all people like you do is talk crap on it. and by "people like you" i mean Christians. and by "christians"....
@MrMikeludo and by "Christians," I mean mindless inbreeds who walk around aimlessly believing in a fake handbook that contains commands to do (much like a dog) and ravish all those who do not agree with their opinion, much like what you are doing right now
@JoeJonesMusic Uh, dude, I don't know what happened to you when you were young: were you raped by a priest or something? But you should seek professional help.
@MrMikeludo that dude was raped by a football player from minor league pretending to be a legit priest, so his first time raped by a priest time was crushed, forgive him
geometrical equations, effectually functioning as, while remaining subserviant to, a hierarchically structured whole: symphony. Even the elementary, intrinsic, basic cognitive capability of experiencing music is the pinnacle antithesis of Pollock. As the beginning cognitive function of music, is a person's developed capability to 'see' fundamental frequency modulations: 'notes,' and NOT 'COLOR.' To be able to see pure - unadulterated "beauty" -that which requires a developed cognitive capability
of beauty, but also the epitome of uniquely humanistic cognitive capabilities. This ability can become augmented or degraded, it is a gradual process. The existence of Pollock enables us to know that a huge amount has been affected. So, imagine that you are the someone who has produced a pictorial equivalent of Mozart? Do you really believe it is just that easy, as throwing some paint on a canvas? No it is not. Mozart is a concordant, polyphonically structured whole, of non-tangible form...
i used think pollock was bollocks. then i moved to NYC and went to the MET. i saw a large painting there, which upon seeing 'through' it, I realized it was literally a mosaic of snapshots of scenes of life, rendered from the mind's eye, restaurant interiors, cityscapes, alleys, doctor's offices, seasides, aerial views, roads, hills, beaches, houses, neighborhoods ... he created this unconsciously. that is why the 90 million price tag. go see for yourself.
@carbineautomatic Dude, what the hell are you talking about. The reason for the 90 mil price tag is because the people who buy it have never done an honest day's work in their lives. When I was 10, my father said to me, come here son, I'm going to show you how to paint a room. The first thing you do is put down a tarp, so you don't spill paint on the floor AND RUIN IT. Every person who has ever painted a room has created a 'Pollock.'
@MrMikeludo Who the hell takes the time to intentionally watch a video showcasing the paintings of an artist they hate, type a paragraph about why that artist should be hated, then come back days later to type another? Have you really nothing better to do than bitch and moan about a painter who died 55 years ago? Just because a painting doesn't require classical training and isn't "of" anything doesn't mean it isn't beautiful. Try to relax.
@chilipeppers91 I'm someone who has a vested interest in this, as well as a moral understanding of it's implications. If someone took food out of your mouth I'm sure you would be upset also. And, actually, that: mankind's understanding of 'beauty,' is the exact issue. Factually - scientifically, Pollock's pictures are the antithesis of beauty: harmony, they are defined discord - noise. So, what you are defining is complacency and brainwashing: you, remaining subserviant to corporate values.
@MrMikeludo The act of willfully buying a painting is so very different from being robbed that I'm left dumbfounded by your ability to group them. Moreover, your understanding of the word "beauty" is cold and lifeless, equating it with "banality" and "orderliness." Clouds are shapeless. A cloud's coloration is the result of neither planning nor effort. Are clouds not beautiful? Does the very thought of a cloud being considered "art" piss you off?
@chilipeppers91 What I am referring to is the raping of mankind - the stealing of mankind's intelligence. do you really know nothing about what has happened? The rich pay 160 mil for a Pollock because some people have conned the world into believing that Pollock is the pictorial equivalent of Mozart:"Some artists, like Mozart, find their voice early, but (not) Pollock." He is not. He is the pictorial equivalent of tires screeching, babies crying and glass breaking.Mozart represents the epitome..
Because we want to educate ourselves more about why other people consider his work "fine art". The one thing that I cannot get past is the lack of human emotion in his paintings. When nothing is recognizable then you just have colors and the aesthetic to take in. I understand the last two, but am unable to have a connection with the painting on a human level
@sankondbest1 i actually think these have emotion bursting out of them... they remind me of how the images in my mind look when i'm not thinking in words (aka, thinking in emotions and pictures). the changes in the movements (between jerky and smooth) feel different and represent a different state of mind to me. i have a great connection to these painting on a human level. you're entitled to hate his work as much as you want though, freedom of speech and all that. i just happen to love it. :)
Jackson Pollock was a simpleton and a con-artist. His only "art" was his ability to find people who were more simple minded and gullible than he was. It's a sad reflection of our society that there could ever exist such a thing as his existence. Only a society which has degenerated as low as is humanly possible would tolerate it, which explains the aristocracy "buying" it, but now the degradation appears to be spreading to the, once, truly intelligent common man masses.
In #17 There is a pony in the top left. A women on her knees at the far right bottom.
On the bottom far left its a man with a large arm and a skeletal head facing the left page. There's a cartoon looking guy grabbing him from behind. They look scared and trap to me. Maybe i'm nuts but thats what i get from it.
what does it matter whether a work was easy to make or not? I like most abstract art more than 90% of reinassance art I've seen (that being said, there are other realist styles that I do love). technically, pollock IS an accomplished artist. his work is a magnification of the painterly gesture, an element that all painting has normally on a microscopic level. It is raw gesturalism in its purest form. When you look at a pollock, you see the energy and rhythm of its creation, not unlike music.
Abstract Expression is an art movement that does not use shape and forms but instead uses color and motion to portray emotion...doesn't that sound more like something connected to emotions-color and movement rather than shapes and objects? Jackson Pollock was a great artist and his paintings will live on! :-)
Jackson Pollock was an abstract expressionist painter. He "spilled" the paint but he stated he had complete control over the paint. There are no accidents in his paintings. He is really a great artist. When he felt he lost the painting he would throw it away and start fresh. Experts have taken these discarded pieces of canvas and examined them and found that ones he felt were "successful" (Pollock) followed a certain mathematical equation. Those that Pollock discarded had not followed it
Jackson Pollock was an abstract expressionist painter. He "spilled" the paint but he stated he had complete control over the paint. There are no accidents in his paintings. He is really a great artist. When he felt he lost the painting he would throw it away and start fresh. Experts have taken these discarded pieces of canvas and examined them and found that ones he felt were "successful" (Pollock) followed a certain mathematical equation. Those that Pollock discarded had not followed it.
I found out about Pollock through my tutors at London College of Fashion as I use the same techniques in my work for bleeding ink. Mostly I use this as a background and draw from it or into it.
Some people may say it is just splattered paint but then again, Pollock made his art to express his feelings, not expecting to get millions from it later.
If anyone likes art, or knows about art, it is not merely just splattered paint, it is a way of showing how he felt onto canvas
Its confusing why people are attracted to this work but also completely understandable why peoplemay critisize his work. Its so visually bold and mind stimulative - it looks nice and graphic.. and also easy to hate on because of the outstanding lack of talent needed to create this work but the innovation is still amazing, love you pollock
@AngeliaClaire A Jackson Pollock original would set you back MILLIONS of dollars! A lady in the USA recently bought a painting at a yard sale coz it looked like a good copy of a Pollock painting ...she paid 8 bucks for it. It turned out to be an original ...and its estimated value is 90 million dollars. I bet the people who sold it at the yard sale not realizing what they were selling will never forgive themselves! She got one hell of a bargain!
oops...I thought I was looking at the drop sheets of a house painter,....but someone told me that this is art...!!!!!!!!!! and why spend money on equipment for the Children's Hospital when it can be spent on work of this quality...!!!
There is no real talent in this kind of paintings. Real Talent is the capacity to reproduce reality like a photography, Thats what's hard and that why i respect so much the painters of centuries ago. Pollock just developed a personal style of trowing paint to in a canvas. Abstract art will always be a hoax once that it is the viewer who attribute random value to the work. Realistic painting is like music. You feel and see who is good and who is bad.
@GurgleOneSixSix Like i said, it's the viewer taste who will decide if it looks good or bad. Thats why abstract art is an oax. In reality paintings the art is there. You may like or not the representation but noone can deny the talent of the painter. Then there is teh FACT that a reality painter can also trow paint in some weird form at a canvas but, the abstract painter cannot represent reality. If he could, he would be painting reality.
@ultimategoobah gr8 for you. Facts are that a real painter can do crapp like taht anytime. Pollock is not capable to represent reality so he sucks as a painter. You see what ever you want. I see nothing and nothing is there. If you project ideas on it then you are the artist not the guy who trows buckets of paint.
@GabKoost you don't know what you're talking about. You don't see anything at all because you have no idea what is being done. Look at all of pollocks work and see for yourself what he learned.
@ultimategoobah Pollock art and all Abstract "artists" only depend from the observer imagination. You are the artist not him because you are the one imagining. Abstract art can have a decoration purpose but nothing more than that.
@GabKoost so what? we may argue over what "decoration" means, because I think decoration is as deep as anything. call it what you want. I don't care. There is much to see. No reason to hate on this mans work.
pollock gives great hope to all talentless wannabe artists that they too can succeed and be adored, that's why he's held in such high esteem. it opens a new world of possibilities.
@jamilor He gives hope to every person who wants to express his feelings true art, he is the father of emotional expresion he is every artist descendent a person who somebody likes me feel proud of and whos art has imfluence me a whole lot.
i do think the squiggly lines are high art. he wanted to make every inch of the canvas art. if you tried to do that it would look simplistic in comparison.
Blue Poles is without doubt the very best. When Australia bought it, it caused a storm. People couldn't see how it was worth 5 million US (in 1973). Recently the US offered over 200 mill for it. It still hangs in Canberra. It changed the way I see art. It is brilliant.
Blue Poles is without doubt the very best. When Australia bought it, it caused a storm. People couldn't see how it was worth 5 million US (in 1973). Recently the US offered over 200 mill for it. It still hangs in Canberra. It changed the way I see art. It is brilliant.
I liked number nine. and a couple of the others. They are paintings that you can stare at for hours and still see new images, new connections, & trigger new ideas. However the rest is fucking garbage. Number 15 for example is a cluttered piece of shit which revolts all good sensibilities. If I had that hanging on my wall, I would be subconsciously repelled by it, not attracted to it
The king has no clothes. Pollock is an overblown bullshit artist. He is probably laughing his ass off at you saps
i can draw good i enhereted it from jackson pollock he is my great great uncle ill put it this way he is my granpa john pollock uncle look at my art and stuff
What the hell does top 20 mean? These rankings are eccentric. My list would be very different: I think Pollock painted his best works in the 1950: MoMA's One: Number 31, the Met's Autumn Rhythm, the National Gallery's Lavender Mist. The rest of the list would include some earlier drips and some others from 1953, including Blues Poles. Also Mural of 1943 and maybe a few other works from the mid-40s before Pollock started dripping. Don't much like the black-and-white series from 1951.
Those of you who left bad comments....you have no idea about being a surrealist artist....neither do you have any concept of art or the feelings of an artist....before you comment on something you DO NOT understand....study about surrealism, abstract art and modern art, then feel free to leave a normal comment! Jackson Pollock was an amazing artist who painted with the canvas on the floor instead of an easel. Study the man behind the art as well!!!!
Those of you who left bad comments....you have no idea about being a surrealist artist....neither do you have any concept of art or the feelings of an artist....before you comment on something you DO NOT understand....study about surrealism, abstract art and modern art, then feel free to leave a normal comment! Jackson Pollock was an amazing artist who painted with the canvas on the floor instead of an easel. Study the man behind the art as well!!!!
Its not just spilled paint, it is Expressionist Art. Each piece is an expression of what he was feeling at the given time he worked on it. Its an extremely fun thing to do also.
@King110324 ... fucking music for an art as quality-embed as the Jackson Pollock painting... I would suggest using another kind of themes, that song sucks
@King110324 I have to disagree with you. I'm definitely not looking to start a stupid YouTube fight, but I'm working on a Jackson Pollock presentation for my Visual Arts course and I have information that credits him for being 'great'. Pollock said that he was always 'one' with his paintings in his book My Painting. He didn't simply fling paint on canvas, his innermost being created works of art. I wouldn't consider him traditionally great like Michelangelo, but he definitely deserves credit.
@samn100 He was supposed to have "gotten into" his art when he painted it. If you've seen one in person, it honestly changes the way you think about it. I've seen #12 up close and, other than the fact that it is literally chipping off of the canvas, it's pretty interesting...
@samn100 -- As the artist Vance Kirkland would say..." A person should not pick up a volume written in an unknown language and then decide that the book is not good just because one cannot read it"
Abstract Expressionism is about the feel a person gets (my interpretation) from a work. If you have the chance to see a Pollock up close, you may get the taste. there is power i the strokes. There is a purpose. It may not look like it from a video, but it is there. The experience is amazing
Vance Kirkland (look him up, he's great) once said "Do not pick up a volume written in an unknown language and say it is not good just because you don't understand it"
That, to me, is very true.
I am an abstract painter, and have encountered people saying similar things to what you say. What I can tell you, is that if you see a Pollock in person, you notice definitive and purposeful strokes. They may not be from a brush, but they are exact.
@kenelwell You got it Brother, because people like to talk bullshit about this guys and thanks to them, abstract art exist the way we know it today, the purest level of self expretion in this world came from the minds of the names you mentioned, They just dont know what is like. There is a reason why this paintings cost so much. love to you were ever you are. and may God bless you with the spirit of a true artist.
@kenelwell we can use his method but every one of us will have a different outcome because everything that we do using the drip method is original it creates a new story each time you throw paint onto the canvas and it allows people to find their own meaning to the work.
@samn100 That is so ignorant, and don't say that little children could do this, because they cannot. Go take you're unintelligent comments elsewhere, and don't comment back on this with some stupid retaliation, because it will be pointless.
for me the best is "lavender mist", I don't remember the number.
vouni1 1 day ago
Jackson Pollock's work is art. He knew what he was doing when he was making these paintings. You can try to make one like his, but it will probably look terrible unless you're a good artist.
Cuyeful 2 weeks ago
His work was doo doo.....
Serpo71 2 weeks ago
ALL art is nothing more than a form of expression. It is human nature to lash out, point fingers and laugh, hate, make disparaging remarks, all because of that persons failures to understand.
Artist's create for varied reasons that belongs to them only. Their gift to us is their end result.
...what is so wrong with that. Please people, stop the hating. You don't have to like ANYTHING, but, please...keep the negative crap for your on-line gaming friends. I say this because I live an artist life.
barfumie 1 month ago
Oh, now I get it. It's less of an image and more of an emotion
loudfastrulez 1 month ago
I'm doing a report on him in art Thanks King110324 this helped to see wat he did :)
ElizabethEades4112 1 month ago
im going to a museum whos artist this month is jackson pollock
SOLE1PRODUCTIONS 2 months ago
@SOLE1PRODUCTIONS Wat museum???????????
ElizabethEades4112 1 month ago
@ElizabethEades4112 lol i live in Japan and the museum is in nagoya, called the aichi prefectural museum.
It was truly amazing! they had footage of him work of his death, they had the floor that he worked on all covered in paint and random splashes, the floor itself was a work of art. a lot of paintings of course...quite spectacular, it was my first ever museum, the atmosphere was erie almost.
SOLE1PRODUCTIONS 1 month ago
@ElizabethEades4112 *him working and of his death.
SOLE1PRODUCTIONS 1 month ago
this con man convinced a lot of idiots he could paint. Good on him for ripping off the idiots of the world. If I could shit on a canvas and sell it for a million I would.
TheEodtch 2 months ago
@TheEodtch He was expressing himself. What is the problem with that? People buying his work for millions does not change that.
chaosproduction 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
Why the vitriol ? That's Art folks! some you love, some you hate, a more subjective world i know not, beauty really is in the eye of the beholder.....................
Broomehall 2 months ago
@MrMikeludo who takes the time to watch theese videos? you do. you looked at it
pinkorbit18 2 months ago
if all of you guys hate his art so much than why did you even look at his videos
pinkorbit18 2 months ago
I should change professions. This shit looks EASY
yeahtoast2011 3 months ago
paintings are meant to be looked at.
Atticus102788 4 months ago
Seeing 20 works together made me understand why Pollock was such a great artist. Some of them made me think of Miro.It is such an array of styles that surprised me. He is not just the dribble man.
Thanks!
loulou2lou 4 months ago
My question about Pollock "art" is: "WiLL IT BLEND"?
GabKoost 4 months ago 4
@GabKoost only if you have a spare 50-150 million to waist
Alias828 4 months ago
@Alias828 It already look blended to me.
GabKoost 4 months ago
@GabKoost hahaha, yeah for sure
Alias828 4 months ago
@GabKoost maybe they already are or have been?
jutubaeh 3 months ago
Bad choice of song. I think something by Ornette Coleman would be more appropo.
mcerion 5 months ago
@mcerion it is appropriate if you think of the spirit of abstract expressionism, which is an invitation for reflection on the part of the viewer. if you are moved by Pollock's work and you hear "Iris" in your mind, then its perfectly fine to do so.
NotNamedJones 4 months ago
What a bullshit artist. My two year old does the exact same thing with her finger-paints.
hakkujin 5 months ago
@hakkujin The main difference between your 2 year old and Jackson Pollock is that he did it more than 50 years ago when no one ever did anything like that before.
It's easy to say things like "I can do that" or in your case " My two year old does the exact same thing with her finger-paints" ... but in reality try taking a blank piece of canvas/paper/panel and make something out of it without trying to copy what someone has done before and come up with a whole new visual language.
Don't hate.
Grandizer33 5 months ago
@Grandizer33 I'm not hating, I'm just being realistic. If Jackson Pollock did ever a painting that proved he had a knowledge of horizon or shading or even a sketch, I would feel differently. Before Picasso moved along to cubism, he proved that he could paint a traditional painting. He did a self portrait and "First Communion" among others. Dali was abstract, but there were images and his images were amazing. Pollack just threw paint on a canvas. He never showed us that he can even draw a flower.
hakkujin 5 months ago
@hakkujin Actually he studied with Regionalist painter Thomas Hart Benton at the Art Students' League in New York. In the 1930s his work was very Regionalists like and he was also influenced by the Mexican muralist painters. The focus of Regionalists art is to create scenes of rural life and it is like traditional painting with lanscapes and figures. In the mid 1940s he changed his style to abstract painting which lead to the drip style that he is famous for.
Grandizer33 5 months ago 2
@hakkujin that's a good argument.
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
@Grandizer33 Ah! you are trying to say that he was the first to randomly trow paint to a canvas? Seriously? This guy was the first to be shameless enough to present this oax has ART. There is no talent whatsoever here. All the rest are people giving their own impressions about a meaningless thing. Any painter can do what he does. Can he do what real painters do? NO he can't.
GabKoost 4 months ago
@GabKoost Of course he can do what "real painters" do and he used to do that kind of artwork. But he decided to do something different. Since there is no talent here and any painter can do what he does. I would like to challenge you and would like to see if you can do what he does since it takes no talent. Please make a painting like Jackson Pollock and posted it up. I would like to see what a no talented person like you can do. Either do the challenge and prove me wrong or stop complaining.
Grandizer33 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GabKoost Of course he can do what "real painters" do and he used to do that kind of artwork. But he decided to do something different. Since there is no talent here and any painter can do what he does. I would like to challenge you and would like to see if you can do what he does since it takes no talent. Please make a painting like Jackson Pollock and posted it up. I would like to see what a no talented person like you can do. Either do the challenge and prove me wrong or stop complaining.
Grandizer33 4 months ago
really ? this song with this video?
Pollock is rolling in his grave right now..
masonkim7 6 months ago
@masonkim7 hahahahaha yeah
Paulallanreeder 5 months ago
@masonkim7 i agree. it's a beautiful song, but still seems a bit too mainstream for a video focusing on such an unconventional free-thinking individual.
RootbeerAndBeans 5 months ago
I agree with MrMikeLudo
MsLol612 6 months ago
So, suppose you are one of the people who can experience Mozart - pure beauty, and replicate it pictorially. But the world has become brainwashed, and affected, into being only capable of believing, or understanding, what the worldly power mongers have brainwashed them into believing? Would you not be upset? Would you not be enraged?Yes, if you spent 20 years developing the ability to replicate Mozart, and the world has become conned into believing that it is 'just that easy,' you would be.
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@MrMikeludo Beauty can be created without painstaking labor. Thelonious Monk, Jimi Hendrix, Sonic Youth, even Mozart and Beethoven are all known for improvisational prowess. Mozart's improv is the same as Pollock's painting, throwing some fingers at a piano. Are we both feeble minded fools, brainwashed (for no logical reason) by power mongers, to believe Mozart is beautiful?
P.S. Through what sort of crazy Wile E. Coyote scheme could one derive power from brainwashing the art community?
chilipeppers91 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 You're kidding, right?The definition of power is money, Or, a person, or group, having control over others - to get money. It's the sweetest scheme in the history of the world: A guy says to another guy; 'you throw some paint on a canvas, I'll convince the world you're a genius, and we'll split 100 mil.' Bach said:'I have worked hard. Anyone who works as hard will go as far.' Mozart said the same. Scientists now say it takes 10 thousand hours for anyone to become a master...
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 in any endeavor. The scientific fact is Pollock is not music - in any form. Music IS defined 3-dimensional fundamental frequency modulations, not 2-dimensional color. The definition of 'color,' is: 'one of the physical attributes of mass' - pure mass. You see, your words contradict your sentiment. Yes a cloud is beautiful, so is a tree, and a brook. Except, Pollock didn't paint a cloud, a tree, or a brook. He painted nothing, defined nothing. Moreover, why would anyone pay some..
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 money to see a picture of a cloud, a tree, or a brook, when they could go outside and see a real cloud -tree and brook. They wouldn't. But Mozart created something extraordinarily unique. Something that you can not simply hear outside. that's why 200 years ago people would pay money to be let inside to hear Mozart. Because his music is exactly 'different' than random noise. So, why would someone pay some money to see a picture of random noise: Pollock, when you can see random...
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 noise outside in reality. You wouldn't. The answear is; 'Confusing the map with the territory.' Music can induce a varity of biochemicals: serotonin and endorphins, which require a cognitive capability to experience.There is another biochemical:dopamine. Dopamine is 'sex' and almost everything else, including musical sounds and 'color': 'Pollock's color.' Except, cognitively, Pollock's picturs are defined noise.So, if a person employes there intelligence when looking at Pollock..
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 there mind will percieve 'noise,' and cause them to move in a direction away from Pollock's pictures. Of course there should exist 'sex': 'color,' in society, but there should also exist the defined pinnacle antithesis: Mozart - the literally defined pinnacle of uniquely humanistic cognitive capabilities. The 'sex' belongs in the brothels, and not in a 'museum.'Do you believe we should have a society where there exists nothing but sex, well look around. Intelligent people don't.
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@MrMikeludo I contend that Mozart and his father were also conmen. The young Amadeus would arbitrarily throw random notes together and his father would tell everyone that it was magnificent, and all the more impressive because of his young age. The concert hall operators realized they could make a killing off of this pathetic gimmick, so they aided in convincing the simpletons that he was a genius. The brainwashing was so effective that people still think Mozart was competent. True story.
chilipeppers91 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 That is literally insane. Human beings do not invent the laws of harmonic functions, we learn them. But they exist a priori. Take a string, stretch it to a certain length, pluck the string - effect a note. Half the length, pluck it again, and effect a note an octave above the previous: fact - science- nature. Mozart's music contains a very complex syntax - or structure, which is also a reflection of reality. It is the function of geometrical equations. Science now confirms the...
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 fact that this syntax is both a reflection of reality and the definition of intelligence:"The equivalent of the machine language of the brain is very complex field configurations - the mind of man contains only so many visions; four recurrent geometrical forms - Life is patterns in space/time (not) physical things - consciousness is a space/time manifold - Einstein replaced Newton's space with a network of light beams."Again, this is the exact reason for the analogy and the con..
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 This is 'why' people say Pollock - or anyone else, is 'like Mozart.' Mozart learned how to 'arrange' the building blocks: notes, in a manner that no one else could: 'COULD.' Which is what made him Mozart, and a defined genius. The fact is anyone can: 'CAN,' do exactly what Pollock did, and millions do every day: when they paint a room. Here's a question: if you are so anxious to actually see the literally defined equivalent of Mozart - and/or any visual music, why don't you...
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 let me explain it for you and tell you where you can actually see one: belonging to Leonardo da Vinci. The usual reason, and the reason for the 'art' community relunctance, is because it requires 'work' to actually experience it. You see, that is the reason for the con. I mean there does actually exist one: literal visual musical equivalent, but it requires work to experience it: They - the 'art' community, don't want to have to do any work, they just want all the glory.
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91 And that is the exact reason that the rich pay 160 mil for a Pollock - a picture of pure pictorial gibberish. Because, they simply do not want to admit that they spent their lives doing nothing except trying to make as much money as they can. Then, after they realize their lives are meaningless they buy a 'Pollock' - tell the world they are geniuses, and give their misreable lives some credence. But that is also exactly why they would never admit they are wrong, how about you?
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@MrMikeludo I think that you assume you're more of a genius than you really are. It's so easy to be a critic.
tf2weekly 6 months ago
@tf2weekly Where - anywhere, is this dialogue, did I say I consider myself to be a genius, or even express an 'opinion' about anything? You must be one of those people who owns no mirrors, but only the reflection which you choose to see: You are someome who stands in front of Pollock - defined nonsensical gibberish, and claims: "I can 'see' genius here - in this vague cacophony of crap, ergo I too am a genius": critic.
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@MrMikeludo are you retarded bro??? i just read all of your comments and you're a fuckin idiot. normally id type out a well thought out comment to someone like you, but you're not even worth it. you said "where did i consider myself a genius, or even express an 'opinion' about anything?" are you retarded??? all of your comments were about how 'untalented' pollock is. and you DO consider yourself a genius because you critique someone who made it in the industry, unlike your poor self
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
@JoeJonesMusic I'm all ears. Beings you consider yourself to be such a brilliant debater, find some type of substantive information, devoid of a simpleminded socio-political automoton opinion, present it in an intelligent manner: "retarded bro," and I will gladly consider it. I am holding my breadth, as I can't wait for your sophistic, closeminded, claptrap rambling.
MrMikeludo 4 months ago
@MrMikeludo if you consider me liking jackson pollock to be the opinion of a "socio-political automoton". you really ARE retarded. NO ONE KNOWS WHO HE IS!!! some people can't even tell you who Picasso is! call me simpleminded? I know a little bit about everything. I think it is YOU, who is truly simple minded. wasting countless hours upon the internetz complaining about the opinion that other people are allowed to have. you're probably a christian. ya...i just went there....
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
@JoeJonesMusic Boy, that really is some substantive information right there. Have you ever even read a book? Keep flapping those arms, you'll get to Planet Zircon eventually.
MrMikeludo 4 months ago
@MrMikeludo If you could divulge one sole reason why I should have to substantiate myself to such an idiotic lack of a being on the internet, I will gladly elicit some substantiated information for you; however, I see no need as it is YOU, who should truly have to present some substantive information. You're the one sitting behind your keyboard hating on a DECEASED MAN! A MAN WHO'S NOT EVEN ALIVE TO DEFEND HIMSELF!
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
@MrMikeludo @MrMikeludo If you could divulge one sole reason why I should have to substantiate myself to such an idiotic lack of a being on the internet, I will gladly elicit some substantiated information for you; however, I see no need as it is YOU, who should truly have to present some substantive information. You're the one sitting behind your keyboard hating on a DECEASED MAN! A MAN WHO'S NOT EVEN ALIVE TO DEFEND HIMSELF!
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrMikeludo and by "Christians," I mean mindless inbreeds who walk around aimlessly believing in a fake handbook that contains commands to do (much like a dog) and ravish all those who do not agree with their opinion, much like what you are doing right now
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
@MrMikeludo And foremost, you're hating on a man with more talent than you could even dream within a dream of having. Those who can't do teach. Those who can't teach talk shit on the internet about people who are dear and immensely talented. You're simply a walking, nameless being who's going to die with a shallow grave and a blank epitaph. People like you don't deserve the internet. all people like you do is talk crap on it. and by "people like you" i mean Christians. and by "christians"....
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
@JoeJonesMusic couldn't have put it better myself ;)
00ReaperGrim 3 months ago
@MrMikeludo and by "Christians," I mean mindless inbreeds who walk around aimlessly believing in a fake handbook that contains commands to do (much like a dog) and ravish all those who do not agree with their opinion, much like what you are doing right now
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
@JoeJonesMusic Uh, dude, I don't know what happened to you when you were young: were you raped by a priest or something? But you should seek professional help.
MrMikeludo 4 months ago
@MrMikeludo look who's talking.............and not talking like an arrogant prick anymore.
JoeJonesMusic 4 months ago
@MrMikeludo that dude was raped by a football player from minor league pretending to be a legit priest, so his first time raped by a priest time was crushed, forgive him
QuantumProphet 4 months ago
geometrical equations, effectually functioning as, while remaining subserviant to, a hierarchically structured whole: symphony. Even the elementary, intrinsic, basic cognitive capability of experiencing music is the pinnacle antithesis of Pollock. As the beginning cognitive function of music, is a person's developed capability to 'see' fundamental frequency modulations: 'notes,' and NOT 'COLOR.' To be able to see pure - unadulterated "beauty" -that which requires a developed cognitive capability
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
of beauty, but also the epitome of uniquely humanistic cognitive capabilities. This ability can become augmented or degraded, it is a gradual process. The existence of Pollock enables us to know that a huge amount has been affected. So, imagine that you are the someone who has produced a pictorial equivalent of Mozart? Do you really believe it is just that easy, as throwing some paint on a canvas? No it is not. Mozart is a concordant, polyphonically structured whole, of non-tangible form...
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
i used think pollock was bollocks. then i moved to NYC and went to the MET. i saw a large painting there, which upon seeing 'through' it, I realized it was literally a mosaic of snapshots of scenes of life, rendered from the mind's eye, restaurant interiors, cityscapes, alleys, doctor's offices, seasides, aerial views, roads, hills, beaches, houses, neighborhoods ... he created this unconsciously. that is why the 90 million price tag. go see for yourself.
carbineautomatic 6 months ago
@carbineautomatic Dude, what the hell are you talking about. The reason for the 90 mil price tag is because the people who buy it have never done an honest day's work in their lives. When I was 10, my father said to me, come here son, I'm going to show you how to paint a room. The first thing you do is put down a tarp, so you don't spill paint on the floor AND RUIN IT. Every person who has ever painted a room has created a 'Pollock.'
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@MrMikeludo Who the hell takes the time to intentionally watch a video showcasing the paintings of an artist they hate, type a paragraph about why that artist should be hated, then come back days later to type another? Have you really nothing better to do than bitch and moan about a painter who died 55 years ago? Just because a painting doesn't require classical training and isn't "of" anything doesn't mean it isn't beautiful. Try to relax.
chilipeppers91 6 months ago 21
@chilipeppers91 I'm someone who has a vested interest in this, as well as a moral understanding of it's implications. If someone took food out of your mouth I'm sure you would be upset also. And, actually, that: mankind's understanding of 'beauty,' is the exact issue. Factually - scientifically, Pollock's pictures are the antithesis of beauty: harmony, they are defined discord - noise. So, what you are defining is complacency and brainwashing: you, remaining subserviant to corporate values.
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@MrMikeludo The act of willfully buying a painting is so very different from being robbed that I'm left dumbfounded by your ability to group them. Moreover, your understanding of the word "beauty" is cold and lifeless, equating it with "banality" and "orderliness." Clouds are shapeless. A cloud's coloration is the result of neither planning nor effort. Are clouds not beautiful? Does the very thought of a cloud being considered "art" piss you off?
chilipeppers91 6 months ago 2
@chilipeppers91 What I am referring to is the raping of mankind - the stealing of mankind's intelligence. do you really know nothing about what has happened? The rich pay 160 mil for a Pollock because some people have conned the world into believing that Pollock is the pictorial equivalent of Mozart:"Some artists, like Mozart, find their voice early, but (not) Pollock." He is not. He is the pictorial equivalent of tires screeching, babies crying and glass breaking.Mozart represents the epitome..
MrMikeludo 6 months ago
@chilipeppers91
Because we want to educate ourselves more about why other people consider his work "fine art". The one thing that I cannot get past is the lack of human emotion in his paintings. When nothing is recognizable then you just have colors and the aesthetic to take in. I understand the last two, but am unable to have a connection with the painting on a human level
sankondbest1 4 months ago
@sankondbest1 i actually think these have emotion bursting out of them... they remind me of how the images in my mind look when i'm not thinking in words (aka, thinking in emotions and pictures). the changes in the movements (between jerky and smooth) feel different and represent a different state of mind to me. i have a great connection to these painting on a human level. you're entitled to hate his work as much as you want though, freedom of speech and all that. i just happen to love it. :)
raspybonbons 4 months ago
@chilipeppers91 wow, this is quite the little argument going on here. you should take your frustrations out by panting.
asbadastv 4 months ago
@asbadastv lol. I guess I'm screaming at a wall when I should be painting one.
chilipeppers91 4 months ago
only dumbasses would call this art
ricefarmer 6 months ago
Jackson Pollock was a simpleton and a con-artist. His only "art" was his ability to find people who were more simple minded and gullible than he was. It's a sad reflection of our society that there could ever exist such a thing as his existence. Only a society which has degenerated as low as is humanly possible would tolerate it, which explains the aristocracy "buying" it, but now the degradation appears to be spreading to the, once, truly intelligent common man masses.
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
The lady is naked and i can tell she is a woman by the shape of body. She is also looking back at something.
Brikeljen 7 months ago
In #17 There is a pony in the top left. A women on her knees at the far right bottom.
On the bottom far left its a man with a large arm and a skeletal head facing the left page. There's a cartoon looking guy grabbing him from behind. They look scared and trap to me. Maybe i'm nuts but thats what i get from it.
Brikeljen 7 months ago
If you really look at theses paintings you can see actually people in them; # 17 for example.
Brikeljen 7 months ago
Oh... the one a 1:14 is startling. It really demands to be looked at. Wow. I mean. Wow.
I really hope I can see that in reality someday.
aC1dxN1gHtM4rEs 7 months ago
...and then there's Michelangelo.
TheRemotestCipher 7 months ago
Nice compilation of JPs work ... and the song is perfect for it!
kbliss103 8 months ago
have mistakes in names(numbers)
84singularity 8 months ago
Gay song is gay.
afterapplepicking 8 months ago
Nice vid.I do miss some of his best works to be honest..I also like his early ones before the dripping time
MARCSPANJERSNL 9 months ago
what does it matter whether a work was easy to make or not? I like most abstract art more than 90% of reinassance art I've seen (that being said, there are other realist styles that I do love). technically, pollock IS an accomplished artist. his work is a magnification of the painterly gesture, an element that all painting has normally on a microscopic level. It is raw gesturalism in its purest form. When you look at a pollock, you see the energy and rhythm of its creation, not unlike music.
NotNamedJones 9 months ago
Abstract Expression is an art movement that does not use shape and forms but instead uses color and motion to portray emotion...doesn't that sound more like something connected to emotions-color and movement rather than shapes and objects? Jackson Pollock was a great artist and his paintings will live on! :-)
day1e 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Jackson Pollock was an abstract expressionist painter. He "spilled" the paint but he stated he had complete control over the paint. There are no accidents in his paintings. He is really a great artist. When he felt he lost the painting he would throw it away and start fresh. Experts have taken these discarded pieces of canvas and examined them and found that ones he felt were "successful" (Pollock) followed a certain mathematical equation. Those that Pollock discarded had not followed it
day1e 10 months ago
Jackson Pollock was an abstract expressionist painter. He "spilled" the paint but he stated he had complete control over the paint. There are no accidents in his paintings. He is really a great artist. When he felt he lost the painting he would throw it away and start fresh. Experts have taken these discarded pieces of canvas and examined them and found that ones he felt were "successful" (Pollock) followed a certain mathematical equation. Those that Pollock discarded had not followed it.
day1e 10 months ago
I found out about Pollock through my tutors at London College of Fashion as I use the same techniques in my work for bleeding ink. Mostly I use this as a background and draw from it or into it.
Some people may say it is just splattered paint but then again, Pollock made his art to express his feelings, not expecting to get millions from it later.
If anyone likes art, or knows about art, it is not merely just splattered paint, it is a way of showing how he felt onto canvas
sophia0091 11 months ago
Its confusing why people are attracted to this work but also completely understandable why peoplemay critisize his work. Its so visually bold and mind stimulative - it looks nice and graphic.. and also easy to hate on because of the outstanding lack of talent needed to create this work but the innovation is still amazing, love you pollock
hahahadropped2000 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ArtEmar4you...
:::
CONGRATULATIONS & Thanks for this beautiful video dedicated
to the Exhilarating & GREAT MASTER... " Jackson POLLOCK " ... ! )
:::
::: Love in someway is like a " Bank Account " ... Nothing you' ll put in it and
nothing you' ll find in it ... ::: PG
:::
ArtEmar4you 11 months ago
I got tears in my eyes. He is or was brilliant! Where can I buy an original? Anyone? ANYONE?
AngeliaClaire 11 months ago
@AngeliaClaire A Jackson Pollock original would set you back MILLIONS of dollars! A lady in the USA recently bought a painting at a yard sale coz it looked like a good copy of a Pollock painting ...she paid 8 bucks for it. It turned out to be an original ...and its estimated value is 90 million dollars. I bet the people who sold it at the yard sale not realizing what they were selling will never forgive themselves! She got one hell of a bargain!
muckyducky70 11 months ago 5
@muckyducky70 YES SHE IS THE ONE WHO WAS ON OPRAH! SHE LIVES IN A TRAILER! WTF!
AngeliaClaire 11 months ago
@muckyducky70 yer good doco, dont think she sold it, was offered 12 million from an arrab so far.
gregthpeg 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Take a look at my video production. You will find all kinds of interesting between heaven and earth! You will not be disappointed!
Movielunatic 11 months ago
bad music choice
imxinnerxpink 1 year ago
oops...I thought I was looking at the drop sheets of a house painter,....but someone told me that this is art...!!!!!!!!!! and why spend money on equipment for the Children's Hospital when it can be spent on work of this quality...!!!
no1dagboy 1 year ago
Jeez, this kind of remind me of the paintings I did in pre-school.
macarthur19 1 year ago
There is no real talent in this kind of paintings. Real Talent is the capacity to reproduce reality like a photography, Thats what's hard and that why i respect so much the painters of centuries ago. Pollock just developed a personal style of trowing paint to in a canvas. Abstract art will always be a hoax once that it is the viewer who attribute random value to the work. Realistic painting is like music. You feel and see who is good and who is bad.
GabKoost 1 year ago
@GabKoost
If it looks good, it's fine. Although this doesn't...
GurgleOneSixSix 1 year ago
@GurgleOneSixSix Like i said, it's the viewer taste who will decide if it looks good or bad. Thats why abstract art is an oax. In reality paintings the art is there. You may like or not the representation but noone can deny the talent of the painter. Then there is teh FACT that a reality painter can also trow paint in some weird form at a canvas but, the abstract painter cannot represent reality. If he could, he would be painting reality.
GabKoost 1 year ago
@GabKoost for me, it's the exact opposite of what you just said.
ultimategoobah 11 months ago
@ultimategoobah gr8 for you. Facts are that a real painter can do crapp like taht anytime. Pollock is not capable to represent reality so he sucks as a painter. You see what ever you want. I see nothing and nothing is there. If you project ideas on it then you are the artist not the guy who trows buckets of paint.
GabKoost 11 months ago
@GabKoost you don't know what you're talking about. You don't see anything at all because you have no idea what is being done. Look at all of pollocks work and see for yourself what he learned.
ultimategoobah 11 months ago
@ultimategoobah Pollock art and all Abstract "artists" only depend from the observer imagination. You are the artist not him because you are the one imagining. Abstract art can have a decoration purpose but nothing more than that.
GabKoost 11 months ago
@GabKoost so what? we may argue over what "decoration" means, because I think decoration is as deep as anything. call it what you want. I don't care. There is much to see. No reason to hate on this mans work.
ultimategoobah 11 months ago
YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS. sorry caps: watch?v=d3Y0Z7dOYCI
mxisalife 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ArtEmar4you...
:::
CONGRATULATIONS & THANKS FOR SUCH NICE VIDEO
ABOUT A EXHILARATING & GREAT ARTIST...
LIKE " Jackson POLLOCK "... ! )
:::
::: In someway love it's just like a " Bank Account "...
Nothing you'll put in it and nothing you'll find in it... ::: PG
:::
ArtEmar4you 1 year ago
pollock gives great hope to all talentless wannabe artists that they too can succeed and be adored, that's why he's held in such high esteem. it opens a new world of possibilities.
jamilor 1 year ago
@jamilor He gives hope to every person who wants to express his feelings true art, he is the father of emotional expresion he is every artist descendent a person who somebody likes me feel proud of and whos art has imfluence me a whole lot.
panamanubian 1 year ago
sorry about the mispelling lol
iwherelivz 1 year ago
meraviglia delle meraviglie . la sua pittura è OLTRE.
gattovalter 1 year ago
Jackson Pollock''''''' you died for a car crash but your work steel alive"""" thanks,,,,,
kaison2429 1 year ago
i do think the squiggly lines are high art. he wanted to make every inch of the canvas art. if you tried to do that it would look simplistic in comparison.
Asolitaryexistence 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Blue Poles is without doubt the very best. When Australia bought it, it caused a storm. People couldn't see how it was worth 5 million US (in 1973). Recently the US offered over 200 mill for it. It still hangs in Canberra. It changed the way I see art. It is brilliant.
Jamestulk 1 year ago
Blue Poles is without doubt the very best. When Australia bought it, it caused a storm. People couldn't see how it was worth 5 million US (in 1973). Recently the US offered over 200 mill for it. It still hangs in Canberra. It changed the way I see art. It is brilliant.
Jamestulk 1 year ago
ths music doesn't quite fit the painting...! think morton feldman, milton babbitt or boulez...
joebassplayer 1 year ago
did someone know the number of the picture which is all black and spots and lines are white... the size is like number 2
84singularity 1 year ago
I liked number nine. and a couple of the others. They are paintings that you can stare at for hours and still see new images, new connections, & trigger new ideas. However the rest is fucking garbage. Number 15 for example is a cluttered piece of shit which revolts all good sensibilities. If I had that hanging on my wall, I would be subconsciously repelled by it, not attracted to it
The king has no clothes. Pollock is an overblown bullshit artist. He is probably laughing his ass off at you saps
fluff125 1 year ago
big deal
Chrisguy42O 1 year ago
i can draw good i enhereted it from jackson pollock he is my great great uncle ill put it this way he is my granpa john pollock uncle look at my art and stuff
TheZeldaskywardsword 1 year ago
3:21
GelandnaleG 1 year ago
1:29
GelandnaleG 1 year ago
he is not rembrant or da vinci but he is pollock and he has a special technique:)
green2fairy 1 year ago
i m greek and i know who pollock is. he is great.......
green2fairy 1 year ago
number 12 is very very good.
gujitragum 1 year ago
pause on number 5 its as though there is a long demon face, creepy
milzz100 1 year ago
@milzz100 its number 2 in the order
milzz100 1 year ago
i really really like number 10, very beautiful
milzz100 1 year ago
I don't see the talent behind this,all I see is something anyone can do.
punchsnakeman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm pretty new at studying art, but this speaks loudly that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder
MrsS623 1 year ago
I'm pretty new at studying art, but this speaks loudly that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
MrsS623 1 year ago
What the hell does top 20 mean? These rankings are eccentric. My list would be very different: I think Pollock painted his best works in the 1950: MoMA's One: Number 31, the Met's Autumn Rhythm, the National Gallery's Lavender Mist. The rest of the list would include some earlier drips and some others from 1953, including Blues Poles. Also Mural of 1943 and maybe a few other works from the mid-40s before Pollock started dripping. Don't much like the black-and-white series from 1951.
skipper2379 1 year ago
@skipper2379 yes indeed , i have to agree with you
fighterdude83 1 year ago
Nobody can make a copy of any of his paintings!!! THATS FOR SURE! :))))
ptlofts 1 year ago
This blows my mind
TRUBADORtv 1 year ago
bland yawn
Chrisguy42O 1 year ago
i dont think its JUST spilled paint, i mean of course its sort of random but he does manage to hold ones attention, i like it
orguitar1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Those of you who left bad comments....you have no idea about being a surrealist artist....neither do you have any concept of art or the feelings of an artist....before you comment on something you DO NOT understand....study about surrealism, abstract art and modern art, then feel free to leave a normal comment! Jackson Pollock was an amazing artist who painted with the canvas on the floor instead of an easel. Study the man behind the art as well!!!!
crnstndrvr39 1 year ago
Those of you who left bad comments....you have no idea about being a surrealist artist....neither do you have any concept of art or the feelings of an artist....before you comment on something you DO NOT understand....study about surrealism, abstract art and modern art, then feel free to leave a normal comment! Jackson Pollock was an amazing artist who painted with the canvas on the floor instead of an easel. Study the man behind the art as well!!!!
crnstndrvr39 1 year ago
Drop clothes ... each and everyone. We are all Pollock. Sheer genius.
zappasaurus 1 year ago
f*cking ugly waste of precious paint
Nightwithe 1 year ago
@Nightwithe Yeah well, some of them are worth millions! MILLIONS!
Mattoid123 1 year ago
Its not just spilled paint, it is Expressionist Art. Each piece is an expression of what he was feeling at the given time he worked on it. Its an extremely fun thing to do also.
Jaketacular420 1 year ago
I know that the video has no sound,but i finde a version with sound...or something..:S...what song is in the video?=)
sunshinekato 1 year ago
How in the world are some squiggly lines art?
samn100 1 year ago
@samn100 to be honest i just posted it for the fun of it, i don't actually count his work among the greats
King110324 1 year ago
@King110324 ... fucking music for an art as quality-embed as the Jackson Pollock painting... I would suggest using another kind of themes, that song sucks
Brainsformed 11 months ago
@King110324 I have to disagree with you. I'm definitely not looking to start a stupid YouTube fight, but I'm working on a Jackson Pollock presentation for my Visual Arts course and I have information that credits him for being 'great'. Pollock said that he was always 'one' with his paintings in his book My Painting. He didn't simply fling paint on canvas, his innermost being created works of art. I wouldn't consider him traditionally great like Michelangelo, but he definitely deserves credit.
FOBilu 10 months ago
@samn100 Dont they affect you at all?
hallstromfineart 1 year ago
@samn100 How are you a human being? This is paint just as it is....being paint.
Super8StrikesBack 1 year ago
@Super8StrikesBack lol paint being paint is so true but people think of it as something else
samn100 1 year ago
@samn100 Yeah, I know. I was being a wiseass. This, for me, charts kind of sticky unconsciousness.
Super8StrikesBack 1 year ago
@samn100 they aren't most of modern art is a PR campaign and fortunately it is starting to wind down.
Pollack was a murderer.
beradification 1 year ago
@samn100 educate yourself.
fighterdude83 1 year ago
@fighterdude83 ? It doesn't take a professional artist to make a kindergarten level painting.
samn100 1 year ago
@samn100 He was supposed to have "gotten into" his art when he painted it. If you've seen one in person, it honestly changes the way you think about it. I've seen #12 up close and, other than the fact that it is literally chipping off of the canvas, it's pretty interesting...
Jitters10 1 year ago
@Jitters10 My art teacher calls em bird poop paintings. Ive seen some of them. They're quite large in person.
samn100 1 year ago
@samn100 -- As the artist Vance Kirkland would say..." A person should not pick up a volume written in an unknown language and then decide that the book is not good just because one cannot read it"
Abstract Expressionism is about the feel a person gets (my interpretation) from a work. If you have the chance to see a Pollock up close, you may get the taste. there is power i the strokes. There is a purpose. It may not look like it from a video, but it is there. The experience is amazing
kenelwell 1 year ago
@kenelwell I seen them before. Creates a feeling of indifference inside me. There was a window where I was more interested in the orange sunset.
samn100 1 year ago
@samn100 as well as all the others...
Vance Kirkland (look him up, he's great) once said "Do not pick up a volume written in an unknown language and say it is not good just because you don't understand it"
That, to me, is very true.
I am an abstract painter, and have encountered people saying similar things to what you say. What I can tell you, is that if you see a Pollock in person, you notice definitive and purposeful strokes. They may not be from a brush, but they are exact.
kenelwell 1 year ago
Comment removed
kenelwell 1 year ago
@samn100 --- Some say they could paint like Pollock. I once thought the same. All I can say is TRY.
Try to do what he did. Try to get the same reaction from Artistic minds. Take your work to a gallery and say you are the new Pollock.
Then lick your wounds, find a new muse, and start fresh.
Find people like Joan Mitchell, Willem DeKooning, Basquiat, Keith haring, and try to think anything you do is original.
Throw paint, but do it in a new style. THATS what Pollock did. what about yours?
kenelwell 1 year ago 8
@kenelwell I can get a class of kindergartners and give them buckets of finger paint and make 5 million dollars from that.
samn100 1 year ago
@kenelwell You got it Brother, because people like to talk bullshit about this guys and thanks to them, abstract art exist the way we know it today, the purest level of self expretion in this world came from the minds of the names you mentioned, They just dont know what is like. There is a reason why this paintings cost so much. love to you were ever you are. and may God bless you with the spirit of a true artist.
panamanubian 9 months ago
@kenelwell we can use his method but every one of us will have a different outcome because everything that we do using the drip method is original it creates a new story each time you throw paint onto the canvas and it allows people to find their own meaning to the work.
skinnyman1423 7 months ago
@samn100 That is so ignorant, and don't say that little children could do this, because they cannot. Go take you're unintelligent comments elsewhere, and don't comment back on this with some stupid retaliation, because it will be pointless.
evansawesomevideos17 1 year ago