Was This Painting Done By A Chimp?

Question

Or a three year old pre-schooler playing with paint?

Or perhaps by an established artist who was playing around with some new (and old) paint blending and shape manipulating technics?

http://pics.livejournal.com/unmired/pic/0005604f/g16

(You can click on the image to enlarge it to see the details.)


Busting A Myth:

I've heard it said many times that abstract artists paint abstracts because they have no real talent or because they can't do realism. While it is that a few can't handle realism the truth is most serious artists (including the famous ones) start out doing life drawings, then move on to representational realism paintings. When they find this too restrictive they start abstracting realism. You say you can do what Jackson Pollock did? No you can't. Only Pollock could do what Pollock did. And it wasn't splatter painting.

Answer 1

But it really doesn't matter if it's "real" talent or not... nobody can tell the difference, in the end!

20/20 did an experiment, showing real and "talented" abstract artists' work alongside the works of 4-year-olds and random pieces of framed fabric.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/GiveMeABreak/Story?id=563146&page=1

People couldn't tell the difference between the "real" abstract art that is shown in museums and the fake art that was created on the spot. Some of the people even said they were artists themselves, and could definitely tell the difference, but chose the "fake" art.

There is some art that has been abstracted, but there is also some art that is too abstract. A dot on a page is not art. Scribbled circles on a chalkboard isn't art.

Answer 2

I'm not an art critic, but I would say this was done by an established artist. The detail in what looks like leaves could not have been done by either a child or a chimp. Just my opinion.

Answer 3

It was done by a 3 year old pre-school chimp who studied under (or on top of) Pollock. He is going to be famous one day.

Answer 4

I don't believe that Chimps have that great a concept of balance and movement, not to mention having an obvious awareness of where the painting begins and ends at the edges.

As much as we tend to snort at Pollock, he new EXACTLY where his edges were, and where his paintings began, where they traveled, and where they ended.

Too bad he used crappy paint... his works will all be gone in half a century.

Answer 5

Looks like art. Deliberate and constructed.

I have seen art done by chimps and kids and it isn't this fluent. I once took my little brother (we are 18 years apart) to art school and he played around with paint. He amazed the everybody with what he could do with paint. Now he actually IS in art school and still can't do what he did then. Probably never will.

Chimp painting look like this:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/images/0603/7c0c686a90d3e2731b4d.jpeg
Raw and lots of space left over. I still like them. They usually have lots of power in them. I would not call it art though...but maybe it is....if you were to think of the chimp as a tool it could be viewed as conceptual art.

Answer 6

If you study the enlarged photo it is easy to see it was painted by a 6 month old Dwarf Hamster that had been blinded in one eye at birth.

Answer 7

No, at least I hope not I am not a fan of abstract art but this seems well done and defined,I would like to think it is considered art,its very nice.do you actually who the artists is?? If so can you post it?

Answer 8

it looks like my 6 year old art students artwork. i really can't imagine a chimp doing this.I also agree with your statement about abstract work.