I understand the distrust of AE and believe that a skeptical approach to the assertions of any kind of art is healthy, whereas simplistic deference to experts breaks down the social trust necessary to elevate the very best above the others. That said, I think Pollack’s vision of “action painting” was special for its complexity, for its imitation of a natural process, and for its human scale, which was limited to the possibilities of a man’s arm moving over the canvas. For those reasons, I find it emotionally moving and thought-provoking, although I get why others might have a hard time with it.
Thank you for this thoughtful note! I really resonated with this, and I agree - I can understand why it may not be some folks’ cup of tea, but I still believe these are special works that pushed interesting boundaries
I think it's unfair to conclude poor "quality" in a painting while disregarding the artist and the state of things around the painting. It's a complex matter. Come to think of it Warhol wasn't an artist at all 🥲
I just adore the AbEx movement. It's a movement that works when you consider the unique blend of crisis upon crisis that characterised the age. In a time of nuclear annihilation, action painting offered an almost meditative, zen approach to painting that was a beautiful kind of peace offering between the USA and their enemy.
I’m intrigued by the idea of it being a peace offering - I love how you put that. I agree that there is something very zen about these paintings; I especially feel that way about Frankenthaler.
Whether or not that was felt by all the artists in the movement, I’m not sure, but it was definitely a sentiment in a lot of the artists who were looking to Eastern traditions of painting including the Gutai movement, as well as traditions of calligraphy. I find the whole CIA thing so crazy because they were so suspicious of these free thinking, peace seeking artists, but at the same time they were being framed as quintessential American painters, symbols of freedom and the capitalist world. I loved your write up! So fascinating and informative. And I adore Frankenthaler too - the women artists of the movement were something else entirely.
We have a huge Frankenthaler in our local museum. It's maybe two or 3 shades of purple and mauve on raw canvas showing through for the background. The whole thing looks tired and aged, more like history than art. Either a colossal failure or a con job that our curators are embarrassed to admit they got taken on. The fact is, if an art student painted the exact thing today it wouldn't be worth the canvas they paid for it.
I grew up on the Triumph of American Abstraction and have loved it so much. Pollock was my hero.
More recently I went to the RA exhibition and expected to be thrilled. But heartachingly, I saw paintings that had passes into history, their intense power now muted if not silent, now to be studied but hardly celebrated.
The Pollocks I've seen with my own eyes were quite dull. I've not seen any major Rothkos. I like Michael Spafford's murals at the Washington State Capitol. I'm sure there are many more. I love art! Have you read Francis Schaeffer on art??
Yes, Schaeffer is important for a Biblical foundation of modern art. Rookmaaker was also in the L’abri community and his Modern Art and the Death of a Culture is worthwhile.
Pollock is a very important painter irrespective of how he is viewed now. It is arguable that he took modernism as far as it could go…
I don’t know the Spafford mural and will look it up. Pollock and others were heavily influenced by Mexican murals, hence the large scale of their work.
I was shaken up by secular author, Suzi Gablik's, book "Has Modernism Failed?". I think Spafford's large scale "12 Labors of Hercules" fall under abstract expressionism and are powerful to see in person. I guess that's why they came to mind even though I haven't thought about them in ages. I love to make greeting cards, but I'm no pro and wouldn't know what to post. What about yours? Thank you!
Ah, That book of Suzi Gablik was an eye opener. I was in art college in the mid 70’s and when I read that book about 5 years ago every word of it rang true. I had dropped out, utterly confused, though I rather blame my immature personality. I worked in psychiatry and then entered the Christian ministry - a very rich experience that was wonderful.
About 12 years ago the creative juices were rekindled by a visit to see Anselm Keifer’s work. I started drawing and painting rather modestly and looked forward to taking it all a bit more seriously when I retired. So that’s me now… but I have no pretences, yet I’ve had some very encouraging experiences.
I think the ultra powerful will always use people as pawns to bolster their influence. Particularly in the art world, where artists rise quite literally from the dirt to international acclaim. I think that is the unfortunate reality of our world and makes it so that many fantastic artists (eg. Ed Paschke) never reach those levels of success. With that said, I was never a Pollock fan until I learned his story from a podcast. The ridiculous amounts of trauma that he endured give his art a completely new meaning (But don’t justify his actions, particularly against poor Lee). I hope to learn more about Abstract Expressionism so that I can write about it in the future! Very well written and thoughtful article!
Vanity of vanities; all (of who and what pass tnemselves, and pass as art) is vanity.
That said, I have no issues with them "artists" and their "art"; as long as I am free not to look at it, listen to its mad screeching ("music"),read about them, or suffer any contact with their vanity married with nihilism.
my father, always said that it was fascinating how many Magicians worked for Military Intelligence in WW2 & beyond. He was a Magician, and an Intentional Performer …
This period of art, was innovative, which I studied in the 70’s and is still as powerful today as it was then. But that student of today, must not copy what’s gone before, but must be inspired to something unique and meaningful for now.
The great thing about Art is that it creates discussion ….
I understand the distrust of AE and believe that a skeptical approach to the assertions of any kind of art is healthy, whereas simplistic deference to experts breaks down the social trust necessary to elevate the very best above the others. That said, I think Pollack’s vision of “action painting” was special for its complexity, for its imitation of a natural process, and for its human scale, which was limited to the possibilities of a man’s arm moving over the canvas. For those reasons, I find it emotionally moving and thought-provoking, although I get why others might have a hard time with it.
Thank you for this thoughtful note! I really resonated with this, and I agree - I can understand why it may not be some folks’ cup of tea, but I still believe these are special works that pushed interesting boundaries
I think it's unfair to conclude poor "quality" in a painting while disregarding the artist and the state of things around the painting. It's a complex matter. Come to think of it Warhol wasn't an artist at all 🥲
Protect Rothko at all costs.
Yes, context is everything!
🤘
Myself, I just go to Lowe's and study the paint swatches.
I just adore the AbEx movement. It's a movement that works when you consider the unique blend of crisis upon crisis that characterised the age. In a time of nuclear annihilation, action painting offered an almost meditative, zen approach to painting that was a beautiful kind of peace offering between the USA and their enemy.
I’m intrigued by the idea of it being a peace offering - I love how you put that. I agree that there is something very zen about these paintings; I especially feel that way about Frankenthaler.
Whether or not that was felt by all the artists in the movement, I’m not sure, but it was definitely a sentiment in a lot of the artists who were looking to Eastern traditions of painting including the Gutai movement, as well as traditions of calligraphy. I find the whole CIA thing so crazy because they were so suspicious of these free thinking, peace seeking artists, but at the same time they were being framed as quintessential American painters, symbols of freedom and the capitalist world. I loved your write up! So fascinating and informative. And I adore Frankenthaler too - the women artists of the movement were something else entirely.
The drips and splatters make me feel anxious. Like I want to tidy them up into something more palatable or recognizable.
We have a huge Frankenthaler in our local museum. It's maybe two or 3 shades of purple and mauve on raw canvas showing through for the background. The whole thing looks tired and aged, more like history than art. Either a colossal failure or a con job that our curators are embarrassed to admit they got taken on. The fact is, if an art student painted the exact thing today it wouldn't be worth the canvas they paid for it.
I grew up on the Triumph of American Abstraction and have loved it so much. Pollock was my hero.
More recently I went to the RA exhibition and expected to be thrilled. But heartachingly, I saw paintings that had passes into history, their intense power now muted if not silent, now to be studied but hardly celebrated.
There was one exception- Rothko….
The Pollocks I've seen with my own eyes were quite dull. I've not seen any major Rothkos. I like Michael Spafford's murals at the Washington State Capitol. I'm sure there are many more. I love art! Have you read Francis Schaeffer on art??
Yes, Schaeffer is important for a Biblical foundation of modern art. Rookmaaker was also in the L’abri community and his Modern Art and the Death of a Culture is worthwhile.
Pollock is a very important painter irrespective of how he is viewed now. It is arguable that he took modernism as far as it could go…
I don’t know the Spafford mural and will look it up. Pollock and others were heavily influenced by Mexican murals, hence the large scale of their work.
If you paint or draw post some 😊!
Warmest regards
I was shaken up by secular author, Suzi Gablik's, book "Has Modernism Failed?". I think Spafford's large scale "12 Labors of Hercules" fall under abstract expressionism and are powerful to see in person. I guess that's why they came to mind even though I haven't thought about them in ages. I love to make greeting cards, but I'm no pro and wouldn't know what to post. What about yours? Thank you!
Ah, That book of Suzi Gablik was an eye opener. I was in art college in the mid 70’s and when I read that book about 5 years ago every word of it rang true. I had dropped out, utterly confused, though I rather blame my immature personality. I worked in psychiatry and then entered the Christian ministry - a very rich experience that was wonderful.
About 12 years ago the creative juices were rekindled by a visit to see Anselm Keifer’s work. I started drawing and painting rather modestly and looked forward to taking it all a bit more seriously when I retired. So that’s me now… but I have no pretences, yet I’ve had some very encouraging experiences.
My work (not updated for quite a while😬) is
philipmcmullen.com
Do have a browse sometime and let me know what you think.
It’s been great having this conversation, Please keep in touch.
Warm regards
I'll take a look.
I saw an installation of Keifer's work at the Pompidou in Paris a couple of years ago. Very memorable and moving! Thanks!
Enjoyed this. Sharing one of my columns. https://coreybmadden.substack.com/p/the-presence-of-art?r=cvi5r
Thanks back at you dear Jay peace Claire
I think the ultra powerful will always use people as pawns to bolster their influence. Particularly in the art world, where artists rise quite literally from the dirt to international acclaim. I think that is the unfortunate reality of our world and makes it so that many fantastic artists (eg. Ed Paschke) never reach those levels of success. With that said, I was never a Pollock fan until I learned his story from a podcast. The ridiculous amounts of trauma that he endured give his art a completely new meaning (But don’t justify his actions, particularly against poor Lee). I hope to learn more about Abstract Expressionism so that I can write about it in the future! Very well written and thoughtful article!
Vanity of vanities; all (of who and what pass tnemselves, and pass as art) is vanity.
That said, I have no issues with them "artists" and their "art"; as long as I am free not to look at it, listen to its mad screeching ("music"),read about them, or suffer any contact with their vanity married with nihilism.
Fascinating,
my father, always said that it was fascinating how many Magicians worked for Military Intelligence in WW2 & beyond. He was a Magician, and an Intentional Performer …
This period of art, was innovative, which I studied in the 70’s and is still as powerful today as it was then. But that student of today, must not copy what’s gone before, but must be inspired to something unique and meaningful for now.
The great thing about Art is that it creates discussion ….
My test: if you hang it turned 90 degrees and no one can tell the difference, then it's crap.