Art? Maybe. Random paint splatters that my 8-year-old sister could do? Definitely. That might sound a little harsh, but those were my first thoughts when I looked at Jackson Pollock’s painting on page 85 of our textbook. Maybe I’m missing something, but when I look at Pollock’s paintings I don’t really sense any skill involved. I’ll admit that they do look neat. But that’s about as far as I’ll go with that.
I guess I should give him some credit for his creativity though, considering that his art is considered the beginning of “action painting.” He also added bits of random objects, such as sand, nails, and bottle shards, to the layers of his paintings, which is a creative way to add texture and make the paintings unique.
Pollock was expelled from 2 different high schools and struggled with alcoholism most of his life, so he obviously had some inner turmoil. Looking at his paintings, they seem like they could be the results of Pollock using painting as an outlet for frustration or troubled emotions. According to Pollock, each of his paintings had a life of their own, with him controlling their direction. Looking at it from that perspective, it’s possible that his paintings were not just random paint splatters, but rather his way of dealing with difficulties in his life. I suppose that that’s what art is really about. Not so much what we, the viewers, see, but the story behind the art.
I still don’t see much talent involved in Pollock’s works, but it’s quite possible that I’m missing something in my very limited knowledge and experience with art. What do you think?