6 ms·
Pollock’s art is not just random splashes but a sophisticated interaction of movement, gravity, and fluid dynamics, creating fractal-like structures. This fract
by Deprogrammer9 2y ago
Pollock’s art is not just random splashes but a sophisticated interaction of movement, gravity, and fluid dynamics, creating fractal-like structures. This fractal nature might contribute to why people find his work visually compelling—it resonates with patterns we see in nature.
- jfengel 2y agoWhat are your thoughts if I don't find it compelling? Is that the end of it, or is there some reason for me to keep seeking emotional resonance in it?
- bigstrat2003 2y agoI mean, it's just random splashes. I don't think there's a reason to convince yourself that there is some compelling hidden meaning to it.
- mturmon 2y agohttps://www.goodreads.com/quotes/29103-try-to-be-one-of-those-on-whom-nothing-is https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/29103-try-to-be-one-of-thos...
- jfengel 2y agoThat is a really good point. I've put a lot of effort into understanding things that didn't appeal and some of them are now very meaningful to me. I thought literature was absurd and now I direct Shakespeare plays. So... I'll think on that.
- noirbot 2y agoIt's not any more random than where you happen to be standing in relation to the clouds at sunset. There's plenty of days that doesn't have any emotional resonance to me, but some days it does. I wouldn't dwell on it, and if you happen to see a piece in person some day, maybe it strikes you differently.
- jfengel 2y agoI haven't spent much time with Pollock, but I've seen an awful lot of Rothkos. Very different style but similar levels of "that looks like it took no thought and has nothing to say". I'm content to say Rothko isn't for me, but I'll reserve judgment on Pollock until I can spend more time in those galleries.
- psytrancefan 2y agoThis app is as interesting as Pollocks's art. A few moments of "interesting" then you close the browser and move on.
- UberFly 2y agoPollock's "art" is generous. The guy splashed random paint around. Buyers would come in and point to the section that "spoke" to them. He'd cut out that section, sign it, and extract thousands from these idiots. Actually, good for him come to think of it.
- umvi 2y agoTo me this reads like someone praising the exquisite quality of the invisible Egyptian cotton forming the emperor's clothes
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- chefandy 2y agoThis is a fun toy. I have no problem naming toys after the serious people and things that inspired it. For all I know, that is exactly what the author of this toy intended to do. Toy isn’t even a denigrating term — play is critically important to many things, especially in visual art. What gets old is the hubris of the tech world thinking that an artist’s intention and methods boil down to a superficial ‘style’— devoid of granular stroke-by-stroke intention, context, or meaning which you can apply to any arbitrary subject or setting to effectively create new works by that artist.