4 ms·
To those who claim this technique is "extremely difficult" so would be any BS "technique" an individual person comes up with according to his own combination of
by michalu 7y ago
To those who claim this technique is "extremely difficult" so would be any BS "technique" an individual person comes up with according to his own combination of moves in random sequence ...
The reason why "modern art" is about "abstracts," "concepts" or whatever dealers and fooled enthusiasts use is because this leaves room for marketing to BS people into believing it is actually "hard" Just notice the sales copies are as abstract as some of these BS paintings.
And if that fails you can always use shame "you just don't understand modern art you pleb" ... and sure just because your scribbles and splashes you tried at home don't look like Pollock's that doesn't make Pollock's technique any more "harder" ... I equally doubt Pollock would emulate your scribbles and splashes ... I doubt any great artist Velasquez or Rembrandt or non-artist would be able to emulate it either.
It's easy, once you perform a highly repetitive task very high number of times, you will start to follow a certain pattern as to save brain output.
Thus anyone splashing paints for such a long time would fall into his own "signature" routine. You don't need to use intellect, deep thought or inspiration.
And once it's legitimised by "specific foot distance" and nonsense like that that he (likely entirely randomly) and equations nobody will ever verify you can safely continue making money not worrying about other BS "artists" overcrowding the space.
- krsdcbl 7y agoWhile you are correct i think with the observation of "own way of doing it is hard to emulate and develops naturally by performing it a lot", i see absolutely no reason to call people like Pollock "BS artists" for it.