Pollock painting (1950)

wonderful! I'd love to see the whole thing :)

That's ART.

sad waste of paint!

Crap.

Pertinentidea wrote:

Yes but this was a pinnacle of artistic theory, noteworthy for one thing because of how radically it deviates from the traditional idea of painting as image making. Despite the fame or being the first or last, every artistic movement requires some figurehead to make it accessible to the man on the street. I agree that its not worth our attention outside of its historical context though, and luckily it seems we'r seeing a rise in representational art again in the 21st centur

That is a logical fallacy. It doesn't matter if he did something first or last. Another is fame. It really makes no difference if he is famous or not. People are known for all sorts of things, from flying to the moon to raping children. The best and the worst. What we have to rethink is if splattering paint, whether on big canvases or small, is worth our attention. For me, its not, simply because there are really astonishing things we can celebrate, both in art and life.