How Art History Got Jackson Pollock All Wrong: And Why It Matters

The popular art historical take on Pollock is that he is important because he made a radical breakthrough, changed the course of art history, and rendered prior styles of painting redundant. This linear model of art history ultimately undermines the worth of his own paintings because it places more importance on ideas and a contrived history than on the inherent worth of art. Worse, this same rhetoric made his own art redundant when the next waves of radical artists mocked him in order to change art history, etc. A further consequence of this imaginary timeline of art history is that more recent artists reacting to Pollock's legacy are creating extreme cringe pieces that work best as self-parody. While Pollock's legacy has become a joke, his actual work is still outstanding.

My Patreon:   / ericwayne  

Support me through PayPal: https://artofericwayne.com/donate-wit...

My Instagram:   / art.eric.wayne  

My Twitter:   / ericwayneart  

My Art and Criticism blog: https://artofericwayne.com/