From our class discussion, it seemed like the general opinion of Pollock was not a good one. Most people in class didn't seem to think he was very creative or very talented, and I had the same opinion at first. But like many art works we have talked about in class, the longer I thought about it, the more it grew on me. My first impression pf Pollock was the same as many others. I thought that it took no talent or creativity, and a child could do the exact same thing. There clearly isn't any depth to his work, it is just him walking around splattering paint all over a canvas on the floor, which really is something even a monkey could do. When I thought about how simple his works were, it hit me that his work might actually be something that I enjoy. It is obvious there isn't any underlying meaning, so we (hopefully) wont have people trying to analyze and pull meaning out of his works. Not trying to dig for meaning and being able to take the picture at face value is refreshing. His works are simple, easy to understand what is going on, and easy on the eyes. Some of this paintings have cool color schemes that are enjoyable to look at. Here is one of his paintings that isn't anything extraordinary, but for some reason I enjoy it.
I feel like Pollock changed the way people look at art. He might not have done works that require a great deal of imagination or talent, but he did do something very original. He made it evident that art is something that anyone can create. I typically think of art as something that would be difficult to make that is done by a well known artist, not something my 4yr old niece made. But Pollock's simplistic approach to art has stretched boundaries of things that I would consider art. Even if you don't like his art, I think he should at least be respected for his originality and ability to challenge people to think about what the definition of art really is.
I agree with you. Even though some of Pollock's works may not take as much creativity or talent, they appeal more to my eyes than many of the other well known artists. I love the different color combinations in his pieces, too. To be honest, he is one of the few artists that we've discussed that I would actually consider putting in my house. I enjoy the mood they create and that you don't have to think about them. I'm not big into analyzing art, so his style is right up my alley.
ReplyDeleteI agree that even though I don't think of Pollock's work as true art it does have an appealing aspect to it. I like that it is just simple and the "you get what you see" feel to it. I kind of like that there isn't depth or hidden meaning to the pieces.
ReplyDeleteI don't really agree that he should be getting millions of dollars for these pieces that don't seem to require talent to make.
We discussed in class the question of if he should be famous for these pieces that "anyone could do" versus the work that takes real talent like Picasso. I think that he is famous for his idea more than for his work. That the originality is what made him, not the artwork itself. Since its the idea that made him famous, knockoff artists would be just that : knockoff artists that are nothing special. Art that requires talent(such as cubism) on the other hand can be copied (or at least the idea) and the artist would still be praised for his/her work. This is because the artists are taking an idea (even though it may not be original) and portraying it in new and original ways.
yeah you have a good point. Some people from class said that they could have made those paintings when they were six. There is no way! While his paintings may appear to be random and chaotic at first, it obviously took some time, effort, and planning to make them. Upon closer inspection you will see that his paintings aren't made up of big splotches of color, but instead they are made up of slender whip-like shapes that blend really well to each other. They colors, in mt opinion, compliment each other nicely giving the paintings casual comfortable atmosphere. I think his paintings are kind of neat, and it is somewhat annoying when people say that they could have done it when they were six.
ReplyDelete