Today marks the birth of the late Jackson Pollock in 1912, an American abstract expressionist painter.
Lavender Mist: Number One, 1950
As an art history nerd, I’m fascinated by the mixed reviews of his artistic work– people either love him or hate him. To some, his paintings have been described as “not art” and “a joke in bad taste”. Those same critics are “astonished that decorative ‘wallpaper’, essentially brainless, could gain such a position in art history alongside Giotto, Titian, and Velázquez.” On the other hand, his creative approach inspired an entirely new style of art: action painting. His departure from traditional art and conventional techniques challenges the audience to question what art really is. How is art defined? And, who judges what is or is not art, good or bad?
Create your own Jackson Pollock painting.
The TC marketing team went to the Modern Museum on Friday for an offsite. We saw lots of Pollack pieces. That dude was nuts.
P.S. We miss our C.H.O.
By: camp4 on February 3, 2009
at 4:37 am
Whether one loves him or whether one dislikes his work, the impact of his work not only upon the art world but also upon popular culture is ensured.
It always seems to me a bit like debating the music of Richard Strauss–love it or hate it, it’s all a bit beside the point and historical by this point, because his influence is integrated into the culture even more than he himself is remembered.
It’s funny, too, how different 20th C. artists evoke such different reactions, though in some ways each was revolutionary. People who “don’t like modern art” can “get” Sol LeWitt, but fail to get Pollock though in some ways the latter, while less “representational”, perhaps, is easier to “explain”.
1912! We fight the intellectual battles of past era
. It’s like debating Chaucer (which might, now that I think about it, be fun).
By: gurdonark on February 14, 2009
at 12:18 pm