Jackson Pollock
Top Comments
All Comments (42)
-
Thats right - the paint performed as Pollock wished it to, in the recent biopic there are blumders, Pollock always knew his materials.
-
He painted the drip style almost in response to being rejected as an artist from schools of fine art, if I am not mistaken. His work was a personal statement, but it was not art in the sense that it spoke of fantasy or transcended him. It was all about Jackson Pollock. Each is a self portrait of him and for him.
-
Expression on the other hand, is strictly based in a desired outcome: political ideas, shock, offense, debate or personal statement on one's self or for one's self. I think Pollack's work falls into the latter.
-
To me the difference between art and expression is that expression does not try to capture something found in fantasy or transcendent of the artist himself. That is the best way I can put it. That fantasy can be romantic,mythic, idyllic, etc and transcends the artist in that everything is not a "self-portrait" or a mode of catharsis.
-
ok fair enough maybe not anyone could do it but I do not know how people can justify it being worth all those millions
-
it takes a tremendous amount of technique to do what hes doing. You can see by how the paint lands that he has total control of what is happening.
-
i dont think he recorded this with the intention of making it a commercial. he just happened to be wearing converse so it made sense.
-
maybe there is but not in this case.
-
why? i kind of like it



this is NOT jackson pollock
voodoo1313 3 years ago 5
hmm interesting.. i take it you are an expert..
looser..
uwazz 3 years ago 2