Yes... but is it art?
Here's a painting I did:
(If you click on it, you should get a bigger version)
The hardest part was sitting on a track for that long with an easel...
---
I was at a BarBeQue with some of the folks from MaiasTown and we were discussing the finer points of art.
We discussed many kinds of Animation styles, and the Animated show "South Park" came up... for those who don't know, South Park is an animation series which is done in a cut out style, as in, they cut out construction paper in the shape of the characters (Badly done, I might add), and move the cardboard pieces around using the "Stop Frame" approach. Though the comedy is pretty funny at times, I have a real hard time getting over the miserable animation.
I admit that I'm a real snob when it comes to Animation... I work really hard to do animation, and I think everyone should work hard too...
But my friend kept asking me; does it evoke a reaction?
And I kept struggling with him... Art, I told him, is something you should work at... toil a little, get your hands dirty. Not throw paint on a canvas and hang it up (*Cough*son Polluck)...
Yes, he replied, but Jackson Polluck evoked a reaction...
My disdain... I snapped back.
And that is a reaction...
True.
But no wonder no one respects artists... how can you compare saving peoples' lives (*CoughMal*) to a piece of Polluck goodness? Polluck splashes paint on a canvas, hangs it up, gets 9 billion dollars, a Doctor saves a life, gets $1000....
It's almost like a life is worth a little less than a 30th of a "Paint second"
Which brings me back to that painting I did.
Wonderful, isn't it?
(you can tell there's a catch, because I'm never this cheeky :D)
It is my work (All of it), nothing was taken off of anyone elses work...
But it's a Photoshop painting of one of my photographs.
So... now is it a good painting? By technicality it is a painting now (Insofar as one can call anything digitally mastered)... but I didn't do the "Work", I just set up the shot...
But if that isn't work... is the Photography art?
Wow... this can give you a real headache...
Just pondering... not having any problems feeling inadequate, don't worry :D
---Me.
posted by Aabh @ 11:57 PM
6 Comments:
Uh, Dude!!!!! It's Jackson "Pollock" note the correct spelling. If you are going to attack him the least that you can do is to spell his name correctly.
Just for the record since you are demeaning one of my favorite artists.
Pollock's "Oil Drop Style" which became known as Abstract Expressionism has a very specific and very stylized technique.
It's not just, how did you so quaintly put it, "throw[ing] paint on a canvas". But a highly laborious and very specific laying of paint onto the canvas. It's quite complex and fascinating.
If you did a little research you would learn that Pollock, like Picasso, was classically trained (and was a student of Thomas Hart Benton) and could do traditional art quite well.
I would think that someone with a degree in art would not need a lowly history major to explain this to him.
Have you ever seen one up close? Maybe you would still feel "disdain" but if you looked deeper you might see more. If you must hate abstract art it's certainly your prerogative.
Try to keep in mind that Pollock was a reflection of his time. And during the Post WWII-Cold War period there was a feeling of fear and alienation. I have always thought that his works reflect a complex world that scares everyone. To me that is definitely an understandable motivation.
Now personally, I respect different styles and techniques as they are. And though I have my favorites I can enjoy any of them.
Southpark on the other hand, well, it does have funny moments but I think that it's part of the disintegration of our culture. That, I’m afraid, is a story for another day.
Oh, and you might want to get some cough medicine for your apparent malady. It's not healthy to be sick all the time. ;-)
I have 4 days off and Bailey is visiting so I’m enjoying the canine companionship, Notre Dame Football and doing some writing this weekend. I’m going to try and edit Chapters 7-10.
Take care of yourself!!!!!!!
Nick
Eh... the ones that I studied had the man on a ladder with latex paint, dropping them wholesale onto the canvas... sometimes even with the bucket.
Actually, I've seen some of his other pieces, and I do like the work he produces when not dropping paint onto canvas.
That, of course, wasn't the point... take any artist whom splashed something onto canvas and called it art and replace Pollock if you must to make you feel better. Pollock was just the first fella that came to mind.
And in your attempt to defend said artist, you missed commenting on my point entirely ;)
Dude!!
I got your point, I just did not feel like commenting on it! I thought that perhaps you needed some instruction on abstract art techniques. And some cough medicine.
By the way Pollock used different means to drop the paint onto the canvas; including buckets and brushes. The point is that there was indeed thought and technique behind it as much as any painting. And, to your point, does art just encompass "pretty pictures"?
As I have said to many people, if you think that it’s so easy then go duplicate it. Interesting, but here have not been any takers.
It’s always easy to dismiss things out of hand, like Southpark (for which I have no real fondness) I prefer to appreciate things for what they are.
And besides, if all we do is to argue over what constitutes "art" (I thought we had this discussion about genealogies and fig leaves?) then it misses the point of art entirely.
Have a good one!!!!
Wow!!
Ten paces and wet noodles guys. I agree with the Dude, I suppose you can drop or throw paint at anything and come up with a term as general as Abstract Expressionism. But Nick your right about South Park and I'm really sorry that Notre Dame didn't play football this weekend. 1 of the 3550
My turn to weigh in and throw gasoline on the fire! :-)
I believe that art CAN provoke a reaction, and that's valid, but it's not the ONLY measure of "Art." It's also valid if it expresses an intellectual idea -- basically, if it makes you THINK rather than FEEL.
I personally don't think or feel anything when I look at a Pollock drop cloth, other than "I can't believe he got people to go apeshit over his drop cloth."
As for South Park... yup, the animation sucks. Not the point. The show is also crass. Also, to me, not the point. It is biting social commentary at the very cutting edge of current events -- it enjoys this position precisely BECAUSE its animation style is so cheap, quick, and dirty. Something can happen in the news on Friday, and it can LITERALLY be part of next Wednesday's new South Park episode.
And when you really look at what they have to say in an episode of South Park, it's almost always thought-provoking, and usually right.
Likening the American voting system to the choice between voting for a "Turd Sandwich" or a "Giant Douche"? Gross? You bet. Accurate? You bet.
I love South Park. Crappy animation and all.
And, I did respect his other stuff...
I guess my feeling is, if you didn't work for it, then it isn't really art...
And I know I'm a snob (which I think is pronounced "Dude" in Nick-eese) :D
Post a Comment
<< Home