More On Pollock

Because I know nothing about Madonna and very little of Spiderman, I will discuss Pollock in relation to Freudian and Foucaultian ideals. Surprisingly enough, I found Pollock to fit quite well with the fundamentals of Freud. As for Foucault, Pollock’s work would probably be considered the purest form of art.

Freud’s writings are largely centered around the belief that one’s true self lies in his/her subconscious. Day-dreams and art are connected, and the significance of art depends on its relationship with the unconscious process. To me Pollock’s pieces are the epitome of this theory. His pieces are strictly the emotions and feelings of the moment he painted; it truly is as though Pollock was “dream[ing] in broad daylight.” Many artists become caught up in the planning and structure of a piece, but Pollock simply picked up a jar of paint and worked out his thoughts onto the canvas.

Pollock’s pieces would also likely appeal to Foucault in that they challenged convention. While I don’t believe this was a deliberate strike against the traditional art world, I do think Pollock worked in a way that he felt expressed himself most effectively. As an artist myself, I understand how constricted my creativity is by societal limitations of the “norm.” It is difficult for many to break convention. Pollock immersed himself in his work and the movement of his pieces. While he had knowledge of technique and method, he created his own approach to the expression of himself. In essence, Pollock lived in Foucault’s intermediary region.

I wouldn’t consider Pollock a favorite artist of mine, but I do have great respect for his work. Freud and Foucault described theories that scored the allure of Pollock and the reason he was so successful.