When discussing both Freud and Foucault, I think Jackson Pollock is a perfect example for some of their key points. Pollock is one of those artists who really tested the art world, mostly by letting go and painting something that his inner muse desired. These are two things that both Freud and Foucault touched on. Freud was interested in how the unconscious can influence art. Foucault discussed how the quality of art is affected by the degree to which it challenges the norms at the time. One could argue that Pollock did both of these things.
The first thing I ever noticed about Jackson Pollock’s work was how chaotic it appeared. There are splotches and streaks going in just about every possible direction. This chaos, that Pollock so effectively illustrates, could quite easily be related to Freud’s unconscious. Freud’s unconscious is very chaotic. It is constantly being influenced by various drives (such as sex and aggression) as well as being suppressed and controlled by the consciousness at the same time. In other words, there is a perpetual struggle going on in our minds. I feel that Pollock’s art truly displays this conflict. I mean, the impulsiveness of his strokes really signify unconscious influences. Yet at the same time, the edge of the canvas puts a control on just how much impulsivity is to be allowed.
One could also see the chaotic nature of Pollock’s work to be very Foucaultian in nature. Pollock was really one of the first painters to paint in that crazy way of his. For this reason he was really testing the art world to see what it would or would not accept as art. Some might say Pollock’s paintings are childish garbage. Others might say that they are masterpieces. Regardless, they certainly made an impact, and that is because they called to question the norms of art at the time. The average painter just simply did not paint in such a ridiculous, abstract way. Foucault would commend Pollock for doing this. His paintings are physical manifestations of the intermediary region described by Foucault in The Order of Things. That is the region of knowledge where people analyze and critique the orders of their society; regardless of whether or not the current orders are best. While people can have mixed opinions about whether or not Pollock’s works are any good, Foucault would argue that because they questioned the art norms of the day, they are an example of art in its purest form.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's interesting that an uneducated person would look at a pollock and say that it is ugly and not at all art, but when you go into art theories (particularly these two), his art stands out as some of the best. It is a good representation of the unconscious (conscious thought of the strokes adds little to its meaning), and the way that he painted was unusual and creative.
ReplyDelete