The Wonders of Jackson Pollock

I had a hard time accepting Pollock’s pieces as true works of art worthy of a museum until I read the Scientific American article “Order in Pollock’s Chaos” by Richard Taylor. I really appreciate the fractal analysis of Pollock’s paintings, since it is based on statistics. Since all of Pollock’s works that were analyzed showed fractals and the fractals developed over time in his works, I felt like it elevated the paintings to works of a true master. Even though Pollock likely did not realize how significant his style of painting was at the time, the fractals prove he was a true genius in his technique. As Taylor pointed out, supposed potential Pollock paintings that he has analyzed do not have fractal patterns. The patterns are obviously not easy to replicate. Further, the development of fractal patterns in Pollock’s works indicate that there was something deliberate in the way Pollock painted and that he saw drips of paint differently than other people saw them. It seems like he was able to capture a natural rhythm that resulted in fractal patterns in his paintings. Since I think the fractal patterns are such a significant discovery in Pollock paintings, I would like to find out what Taylor’s analysis of Teri Horton’s alleged Pollock painting would yield. For me, a fractal pattern analysis of the painting would offer strong evidence to the authenticity of the painting.

The philosopher Danto would likely look at Pollock’s paintings in a similar light as Warhol’s artwork. How could paint thrown all over a canvas or replicas of Brillo boxes be works of art? Pollock seemed to be doing something radically different when he threw paint across huge canvases lying on the ground. Perhaps this is what made his artwork fascinating. A combination of simplicity in how the paintings were done with drips of paint and the complexity of the large patterns in Pollock’s work must have been intriguing enough for some of the public to consider it as art. Whether Pollock intended to evoke a certain emotion in his audience or not, people were able to find connections with his paintings such that his works could be considered art and would be passed on to other generations as works of art. From Danto’s perspective, Pollock’s paintings became successful pieces of art when people accepted them as art. I think his works carried a certain intrigue that drew people in to ponder whether they really were art or not.