@Lightwizard,
I've never seen that deKooning. It's marvelous. An obvioius Picasso influence. What, however, about the color is Duchampish? I do like the effect of analogous colors--I always forget to use them except for breaking up areas with variety or nuance. One day I would like to dedicate an entire picture to that principle.
@JLNobody,
It's basically mono-chromatic -- even the brownish tones are muted orange, but, of course, the hint of blue and the black which is not a color but the absence of color. The landmark birth of modern art was the Armory Show in 1913 and the most talked about piece of art was Duchamp's "Nude Descending a Staircase," a painting in mono-chromatics towards the amber ushering in Futurism (he was more than a Dadaist). Duchamp painted three versions of that image, and many in different chroma. Exactly what he was doing -- breaking up areas with variety or nuance to show motion.
@Lightwizard,
Good. Now I see the Duchamp influence. It's obvious now that you've identified it.
@Amigo,
Amigo, I'm hoping you'll clarify-- because I don't want to watch an 8 minute video on propaganda.
@Gala,
It's a very interesting take on the subject. It is not about politics.
To all the Jackson Pollock FANBOYS: Pollock is sucked off and defended, on the basis that his "ART" wasn't about the finished product, but the "PROCESS" he used when creating it.
Pollock painted, but I wonder if he had chosen MUSIC or FILM as a medium for this "PROCESS"... would he still be considered "a revolutionary artist" or seen for the talentless hack he is?
Pollock was revolutionary, yes. But so are African warlords who commit genocides. And just like them, the revolution Pollock started was NOT a good one! It was a revolution to lower and degrade painting as an art form.
The "process" can only some add appreciation to a work of art. NOT SUBSTITUTE AND BECOME THE ART WORK! For some reason when painting is the medium people can trick themselves into believing this.
Christian Bale in the "Machinist", Robert DeNiro in "Raging Bull", or Heath Ledger as "the Joker" are method actors whose process can we appreciate as far more extreme than Pollock's. BUT their process unlike Pollocks, also produced amazing works of art! Their dedication to their roles as method actors wouldn't count for anything if the movies they starred in weren't any good!
THE FINISHED PRODUCT IS ALWAYS MOST IMPORTANT IN REAL ART. I challenge any Pollock fanboy to apply this love of the "process" to MUSIC or FILMS, whose finished product was of Pollock painting quality. You will see it for the utter garbage that it is!
