I think that Jackson Pollock is a great artist, don't get me wrong. I just don't understand how No. 5 can go for 140 million. A painting like No. 5 is exceptionally personal, and I would think would only have that much value to the artist himself. You can tell his work is not about the ending, but about the process involved, yet others pay more for it than ANY other artist (including Monet, Van Gogh, Picasso, etc.)
I just don't understand how from a purely financial standpoint, Pollock is better than any one else.
2007-11-14 08:10:32 · 8 answers · asked by Fun1 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Painting
Mr Pollock was a major force in abstract expressionism. His first paintings were inspired by Pablo Picasso and then he started to develop his own style as many artist do. The fact that he was killed in an automobile accident also increased his popularity with the art world. It is unfortunate that many artists become famous after their deaths and even more so when they die accidentally.
2007-11-14 13:04:55 · answer #1 · answered by suzb49 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jackson pollock was the first guy to throw paint at a canvas and then sell it. It's a simple as that. He's not AMAZING or unique, he just did it first.
He throws paint at a big canvas then when he's done he decides on a composition he likes and cuts that part out.
the whole Jackson Pollock thing makes me angry- why bother to learn draftmanship when you can just throw paint at a wall.
2007-11-14 14:08:03 · answer #2 · answered by Rhuby 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The question didn't ask whether you liked them or not. What do they mean? Well they represent a specific time in the history of art when a lot of experimentation was going on and they represent one man's way to experiment with oils, with painting, and with getting a record on canvas of his own subconscious mind. He called it 'Action painting' because he tried (with great success by the way) to allow the motions and actions of his body dictate the application of the paint to the canvas. He put himself into a trance-like state and dripped the paint and flung the paint onto large pieces of canvas streatched out on the studio floor. The idea was to take conscious thought out of the process. Brilliant!
2016-05-23 04:13:21 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is a piece of History, created by a person with diofferent outlook on life. Non replaceable and one of a kind piece of work. Also he is very popular right now because of the movie and the people that were young when he was alive can afford his work.
2007-11-14 10:23:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's exciting . He's unique..... Go to Paris and see what the vibe is like today, don't base information on 100 years ago!
You have to learn how to read paintings before you can make such comments surely?!!!
Carolyn
2007-11-14 08:16:27 · answer #5 · answered by caro 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
all the above and his work and style cannot be duplicated easily, (no one's kid can do that).
someone may do something that kind of looks Pollock-y, but believe me, it ain't even close...
2007-11-14 13:48:15 · answer #6 · answered by captsnuf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's all supply and demand. It's like waterfront property - they ain't making any more, and the demand keeps going up, up, and up, so people keep paying more, more, and more.
2007-11-14 08:16:39 · answer #7 · answered by Ralfcoder 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Um because they ain't makin any more .
2007-11-14 19:24:02 · answer #8 · answered by jsfumato 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋