Picasso is a phony and Pollock was a drunk as$hole!!!!

Coluber, I agree. This kind of scribbling can be very suggestive. In the hands of a Pollack it's very effective.

If you see Picasso's earlier work, it's plain he could draw like an angel. He was supremely gifted.
He developed his idiosyncratic style later.

And I think it important to realize the Picasso's drawing ability is seen in his more abstract as well as his more representational works. Drawing abstract forms is drawing.

I got to thinking about your phrase "very little evolutionary potential" as applied to Pollock's drip paintings, and thought the Pollock painting I posted here showed a possible avenue of evolution for Pollock. What is unique about this painting is the thinness and the suggestion of human figures, intentional or not. Pollock may have eventually exhausted the potential for the complex, thickly applied paint, and totally abstract painting, but on the other hand, there was always the possibility of contraction to thinness and the suggestion of representation.

I can't help but think of how the symphonies of Mahler, became larger and larger in terms of length, orchestration, scope, and complexity, but with the suggestion in his "Das Lied Von Der Erde" (situated between sym. nos. 8 and 9) of a movement toward more simplicity. The last movement or song, "Der Abschied" is exquisitely thin in orchestration with moments consisting of nothing but the contralto, a single-note drone by the double basses, and an intermittent gong. Of course Mahler went back to the hugeness in the 9th and 10th, but had Mahler lived another 20 years, I see no reason why he wouldn't have considered a contraction toward more simplicity.

Of course Pollock was no Mahler, but who knows what the future brings. I also think of biological extinction events (contractions) that occurred several times in history where very large percentages of species were wiped out only to allow other avenues of evolution, such as the "glorious accident" of 65 millions years ago that allowed for the eventual rise of the primates.

Coluber, amazing observations.

(listening)

PICASSO LITHOGRAPH
I have what I believe is an original Picasso lithograph (Serigraph?). I ahve contacted one appraiser and he wants about $700 to appraise it. HOwever, he says that he does not need to see the actual work in order to apraise it. Seems like a steep fee for what may amount to a computer search that I may be able to do myself. What cours should I take?

Bert [email protected]

Why do you believe the lithograph is original? Is it signed? Picasso produced no serigraphs (or screenprints) -- too lowly a print medium for him as he created the lithograph stone plates for his original graphics. An appraisal does not authenticate a work even though an accredited appraiser may still give you an document as it will be qualifed with "if the works is original." You have to either take a very good photograph with a close-up of the signature and send it to a museum who actually has a collection of Picasso, or a university art profressor who can authenticate the piece.

There are artists who aren't drunks? Rauschenberg kept a bottle of fine whiskey with him at art openings to take a swig now and then and get pretty potted. Pollock was a self-distructive alcoholic and when his work lost critical acceptance, he really went off the deep end. "Is that all there is," I believe is the lyric of the Peggy Lee song.

All I can add to this is that recently I sat and gazed at a Picasso work that I hadn't seen before - it was on display in the Pompidou Centre. It was a wonderful experience and a highlight of my holiday. So rich in allusions and symbolism and understanding of birth.

When requiring the services of a professional, whether artist, surgeon, hairdresser or lawyer, who cares what their personal/political views are! As long as Picasso works can affect other people profoundly, I don't think it is for any of us to label him in a derogatory manner.

Yes, all that matters is the art itself.

Destroying arts idols or knocking them off the shelf clears it for the new mastery. It's necessary and if it is not necessary it is simply doable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misogynist

A pretty heavy accusation msolgo. Why do you say this? (unofficially)

THE LIFE AND ART OF JACKSON POLLOCK ; He was a drunk, a depressive and a wife-beater. Many say he was also a genius. As one of his paintings sells for a record $140m, David Usborne looks at the private side of 'Jack the Dripper '


If he were alive today, Jackson Pollock, the American painter who electrified the art world with his eruptions of swirling lines and squiggles, would be puzzled by the news. How could it possibly be that one of his paintings - not a Picasso, a Gauguin or Van Gogh - has become the most valuable in history?

After all, not everyone has ever been quite convinced about Pollock and his genius, never mind that he was a drunk, a philanderer and a depressive. Isn't it possible that you or I co...

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-1390706.html

(And what does this mean? -amigo)

---------------------------

Jackson Pollock sucks!

He took a bunch of paint, a color pallet that works and throw paint around evenlly.

And they call it a masterpeice??????? Why???????



I CALL BULL$HIT!!!!

YOU BASTARDS!!!!!!


Why wont you talk to me?


and why can't I draw like Picasso..............................?

because we respect your opinion and are willing to listen to what you have to say.

Blue Poles JAckson Pollock
In 1973, the work was purchased by the Australian Whitlam Government for the National Gallery of Australia for US$2 million (A$1.3 million at the time of payment). At the time, this was the highest price ever paid for a modern painting. In the conservative climate of the time, the purchase created a political and media scandal.

The painting is now one of the most popular exhibits in the gallery, and now is thought to be worth between $100 and $150 million, according to the latest news.[1] It was a centrepiece of the Museum of Modern Art's 1999 retrospective in New York, the first time the painting had returned to America since its purchase.

Jack the dripper-- have you seen his early work, before the drips? Some interesting stuff that shows the evolution into the drips.

I think it's a masterpiece because of his timing. He was the first to break out of the figurative painting/drawing mode. Artist as bad boy...rebel. He was influenced by Thomas hart Benton.

I actually like his work. I agree it was that he was the first it was the timing like you say. But why was he the first?

Why did Pollock do it first?

I can only guess as to why he was first...

I'd say because he was fearless and not bound by convention-- Pollack is the guy who went to a snooty art party and pissed in the fireplace in front of everyone.

He drank a lot and smoked a lot and was totally in the moment with little regard for much anything else except for art and painting. Larger than life. Enormous ego. Supreme abilities...

Oh, and his wife Lee, she took a back seat to his ambition.

I still think think that Pollock was to lazy or drunk or untalented to learn to Illustrate and he got tired of trying so he took the easy way out and started throwing paint around and he was the first to let every other shity artist to do the same intill we caught on.