Why would you consider Jackson Pollock's Convergence Fine art?

Question

Why would you concider Jackson Pollock's Convergence Fine art?

Here a web site that has a picture of it.

http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Convergence-Posters_i825728_.htm

Answer 1

Here's a good website about Jackson Pollock: http://www.nga.gov/feature/pollock/pollockhome.html

You would get a better feeling about his work if you saw it in person. I don't like abstract art as a rule, but his work is visually stunning and filled with emotion. He could paint reality, but we have cameras for that. He uses a lot of organic shapes and themes in his work.

The abstract art I don't like are the ones with solid colors or a bunch of different colored squares. Those to me are just not fine art, more or a con by the artist.

Answer 2

It isn't by Salvador Dali or me! Many Art historians, Dali and I agree that painting reached its zenith in the Baroque period and that Jan Vermeer Van Delft was the best painter who ever lived. Afterwards, there was deterioration. Impressionists had a childish philosophy and made childish paintings. Dali said that one of the Post-Impressionist masters could have painted as well with his feet. He also said that now mere eccentricity is mistaken for originality. I add that obscurantism is mistaken for profundity. Dali rated many artists of the past and in his time in a 1947 book. Vermeer was best by far. Diego Velasquez was next. Not far behind them were Raphael Urbino and Lenardo Da Vinci. He says Pablo Picasso is destructive to painting. Jackson Pollock hadn't appeared when Dali wrote the book, but I can apply Dali's system and give Pollock the same scores he gave Piet Mondriaan. Pollock shows less skill than Mondriaan, so I may give minus scores, since Mondriaan gets mostly zeroes. Rags I use to clean brushes are as much Fine Art as Pollock's smearings. Someone said Pollock created fractals. That's a curiosity, not true Art.

Answer 3

First off, when Pollock did live in San Francisco it was in the late1920s, long before he started doing his drip paintings. And he didn't live in a house that had a garage, he lived in a boarding house that he shared with one of his brothers. And he moved, along with another one of his other brothers, to New York in 1930.

And considering that he died in 1956, and considering that he didn't start doing his drip paintings until after WWII, and considering that all of these drip paintings were done inside his barn on Long Island, NY, (he never owned a house with a usuable garage and lived on Long Island from 1945 until he died) it's hardly likely that he ever met the guy who replied above me and it's equally highly unlikely that he flew out to San Francisco (there is no record of him ever returning to San Francisco) long enough to rent a house in San Francisco with a garage long enough to invite the local artists to help him 'paint' one of his drip paintings. Even if he did that would make cre8ptg at least seventy years old now.

And acrylic house paint produced for common use as a house paint did not appear on the open market until the late 1950s, well after Pollock was dead.


********************************************


Now, about your question: Is 'Convergence' fine art? I didn't think much of Pollock's Action Paintings (as he called them) until I saw several of his paintings in person and understood just how amazing they are. They are much more than drips and splatters and they were not created by random accident. He denied the accident when he painted. They are complex, highly emotionally charged works of art, just as powerful and moving, in their own right, as works done by Hopper or Benton or Warhol or Parish. What they do is require the viewers to think for themselfs (just like classical music requires you to provide your own interpretations). Many people don't want to think for themselves and want their art to look like something easily recognizable. But how does an artist paint pure emotions?

Answer 4

When I lived in San Francisco, Jackson was there at the time. I played chess with him and he was unusually drunk. We all "painted" in his garage on a "painting", with acryllic house paint.
I remember that I chose yellow. Every time I see one of his "paintings" in a gallery, I wonder if it was one that we all worked on.
I don't consider "his" work fine art for that reason!