Jackson Pollock's Non-Drip Paintings 

the universe aligned for this joke

HELP MY!!! My muscles are too big! I am a big tall man and my muscles are even BIGGER! I use them to get views but they HURT so much!!! Because they are heavy. Do you have any advice, dear yan

@@AxxLAfriku hey axxl

When the Gucci Among us imposter doesn't have dri-

@@AxxLAfriku hey axxl

I'm sorry to bother you with something unrelated But 2:58 totally looks like an abstracted sombra right?

Sawtooth? Lmao did not expect to see you as the top comment

@@melodysketchdraws robucc

so close

D R I P S

interesting

I really like it! I feel like I’ve grown up alongside it, and these newer videos reflect my interests now

@@Pehmokettu yeah, all i get on that website is just random accounts sending notes of... not so savory things

Concrete and roses, y’know

oh come on what the fuck

right? its also nice as background noise even though the contents of the video are about art lmao

@@sydneyjavier6659 it's good to put in the backround while I'm drawing atleast for me

Exactly

u mean art? Cause that's kindof a theme through out his channel

No more vore lmao

I don't think it was hard to take for Pollock. He was already a very succesful and wealthy artist back then making art mostly for himself, not for people to enjoy or buy it I guess.

@@cytrynowiec yeah... but the rejection can still hurt

They were really beautiful. It's a shame they didn't sell.

im gonna be honest im kinda glad no one bought them i was relieved when he said that

@@cytrynowiec Contrary to popular rumor, Pollock was not actually very rich. Although he was probably the most famous painter in America, his work did not sell very well. It was too advanced for most collectors. (De Kooning, on the other hand, sold very well). In fact, Pollock was so broke that he often had to trade paintings for groceries at his local store. The store owner later sold it after Pollock died and it is now in the Pompidou.

Is Squidward Really a Good Artist?

@@crittr robucc

more like belongs in the trash!

Bold and trash. Being brave isnt artistic

But certainly not belongs in the trash

And also the truth.

@@luiscuixara4622 pretentious.

@@Kulodemandril ...ok?

@@Kulodemandril technically true

@@Kulodemandril Everything is nature, including us and everything we create and think. To have the audacity and arrogance to claim one is not nature is pretentious.

SHEEEEEEESH

Jackson Pollock can't have drip

@@lildufflebag he invented drip doee

Sheeeeeeesh

I've literally never seen that first emoji before, what the fuck

9:50

@@lillasagna5487 hahaha, yeah I know, but it is later in the video. I just like that he starts of objective..

In what way is a single line of this video "objective". Just because something doesn't make a firm contention doesn't make it "objective"

@@jadefae It’s objective because Solar Sands doesn’t directly choose a side of the argument; the only purpose of this video is to educate people on Jackson Pollock’s other works that don’t involve his usual “splatter” technique. Sure, he gives opinions on how he feels about each artwork, but he doesn’t fully lean into one side or the other. He just states it how it is and lets the viewer make their own opinion on it.

ayee

Drippin too hard D:

Billie Elish and her fanbase when it comes to her clothing.

@DONT stop

@DONT ok i wont

@DONT how original

Yes! Some claim that it's especially difficult to be recognized as an artist today because art is so abundant on the internet. But I think this is a misenterpretation: art has always been abundant. It's just that instead of galleries gatekeeping what is and isn't art, and deciding what should be seen by the masses, now everyone can share their work on platforms where it can (possibly) be seen by practically everyone. The internet has democratized art, and the more pretentios parts of the art "elite" have lost some of their power.

couldnt have said it better myself, i really like looking at concept art for video games, like something Alex Ries makes, something like that would never be in a gallery but is the most beautiful form of art for me.

I agree with every word uttered.

Yeah, I like the ethos of the abstract expressionists specifically because it was anti establishment. It was a complete denial of every preconceived expectation in order to free artists and allow them to express themselves in the way they saw fit. Turning these into luxury investments and creating this elitist aura around them seems like a betrayal of the ideas that brought them into being on the first place.

Pollock disowned that world too. Which was the catalyst for his breakthrough. To do something so new the critiques didn't have a hate to stand on.

@@sheppee5608 bro

@@meeky. no fr im tired if colored people invading youtube

@@sheppee5608 what

@@zxyAprte124 what do u mean "what"? Learn to read

@@sheppee5608 what does that have to do with my comment lmao

Same

Yeah, Knowing that he actually evolved and tried new things is very eye opening. It’s sad that art history has only deemed a very small portion of his work, worth talking about. This specially makes me like him much more, some of his other work reminds me of SAURA, an artist I really like.

Me too, and honestly, I really fell in love with a few of his non-drip pieces here. To be honest, I never knew he did anything besides the drip paintings, so I'm excited to learn about this.

Agreed.

It's fairly obvious that it's money laundering imo

robucc

It's the size

@@nicolasbarbosa8270 definitely

Maybe you should pay attention then.

@@yakub3962 maybe the teacher should have taught it in an interesting way where I would want to pay attention then

@@yakub3962 Not all art teachers teach about artists... Some of them only make you do design chores for some school events or school decoration, some others only give you creativity and painting exercises. Don't just assume all teachers teach the same. Like, there are physics and math teachers who just eat and read a newspaper during every lesson, while the students have to basically teach themselves with their textbooks. Or a history teacher who instead of teaching history give the students summarize a chapter of the history book as homework after each lesson, making the students tell him about history each lesson while he's just eating. Also, some teachers really make paying attention hard when they digress and get side-tracked by unimportant anecdotes of their own life that have nothing to do with the what we're learning... I had teachers who taught their subject in a boring, uninteresting and draining way, but at the very least they were teaching it.

@@einekartoffel2490 So... public school? I know when I see a comrade.

Yep, in my art classes they told me "Abstract art" is a thing. Now i know is just pretentious bullshit

Yeaah beacuse of that, a lot of people bashing him for his small perriod of works

I hate how certain artists are only remembered for a micro work that isn't up to its full potential.

Same

same

Absolutely

Me too, I know I’m in for good content

Ahh yes.My favourite RU-vid,solar sands.

I have to agree. While I usually don't take Pollock that seriously, The Deep demonstrates a very clever and ellaborate technique.

I would assume it is held as a masterpiece. It certainly is a masterpiece, as most if not all of his paintings are

they drippin'

@@renanmendes1299 yessir

thats all that matters!

Lol yea this. I’ve always been a “modern art is dumb” guy but watching this sorta changed my attitude atleast towards pollock. I know next to nothing about art so I can’t explain it but I actually thought a lot of the drip paintings were really nice.

I totally agree. I understand that its not too hard to make, but its just purely fun to look at and thats ok. And it isnt his fault that his art became so expensive, which is purely the "fault" of the art industry, and next time I see someone say "they are just meant for money laundering" I want concrete evidence, and then I will change my mind

Same. They’re always so interesting and well made. :)

don’t we all

@B00B13_B1RD YEP SAME

🥶🥵🥶🥵🥶🥵🤧🤢🤮

Google

‼️

SHHEEESSHHH😬🥶🥶🥶🥵

😳🥶🥶❗

Yeah, me too. But then I read the comments and want to burn an art gallery down just to spite the cunts.

My life would be very different!

Same with Mark Rothko, shame too because the only time I've every seen one of his paintings was with shitty lighting. Rothko paintings are a real "mood".

sound like an excuse “noo you cant judge it from a picture!! youd have to be there to truly understand him...” like we are seeing the same painting dude

@@mejorge420 A painting on canvas is a physical object, often tens of feet wide and tall, and the layers of paint have varying depth and opacity and texture. Not to mention the fact that displays can only recreate a fairly small range of colors compared to what your eye can actually see. In contrast, what you get on a computer screen is a few inches across and usually lossily compressed, smearing out detail even beyond the natural noisiness of the camera. The metaphor may or may not be a bit exaggerated, but it's not devoid of substance.

@@mejorge420 by your logic, watching a film on a smart watch is the same as an IMAX theater

Yeah but judging his paintings by looking at scaleable JPEGs of high quality is more like judging Mozart by listening to it through a decent stereo system - aka pretty fucking close to the original feeling and if it wasnt for this way of looking at it we all wouldnt be looking at it at all (at least most of us)

That pretty succinctly describes the difference between modernist views of art and postmodernist views of art: modernists think art is made good by the effort put into it postodernists think art is made good by the reaction it gets

@@NixodCreations What if art is actually made good by how good it is?

Besides, even if "anyone" could do it, Pollock was the first who actually did.

@@theonlybilge to me, art and artists are "good" when they are able to effectively control the viewers emotions. Art where the artists inent is to impress with technical skill is good when the art shows that technical skill, and bad when it does not. However, that is not the only intent an artist can have. Perhaps an artist wants to anger the viewer (such as protest art), or disgust them (like the famous urinal), or even bore them (like generic hotel room art). It doesnt matter the level of technical skill behind the art, if it achieves its goals well, it's good at being art and the artist is good at making it. However, I feel a lot of people fall into the trap of equating time and effort spent with quality. I can spend hours and hours drawing a stick figure, but that doesnt make it good art. For all its achievements in technical skill, the mona lisa is not really a very compelling painting. The subject matter is banal and lacks a lot of the experimentation and creativity da vinci showed in his other works. Theres a reason that Munch's The Scream is up there with it in terms of the world's most recognizable paintings, despite being objectively less technically skilled. The other trap I see people falling into is the idea that good art is beautiful, and the more beautiful it is, the better it is. But this doesnt make a lot of sense. Is there no room for art that expresses pain or fear or anger or any of the other negative emotions? Can art that depicts vulgar topics not be as "good" as pretty pictures of saints or flowery meadows? Really though, I feel a lot of people are vexed by the idea that someone else is getting credit for something they think they could do easily, and really there isnt much consideration towards the actual meaning behind the idea of "good art". But I think art is about what people get out of it, not what gets put into it. And always remember other people may like things you don't, and your opinion doesn't define something's worth.

@@NixodCreations My opinion actually does define something's worth, because my opinion is better.

Tell a friend

why

@@danielsteger8456 I think his art can convey a lot of depth and emotion, also his life story is interesting

He’s cool because he had the nickname jack the dripper

@@jayv.9016 fr

bcs he drip

Look at you being fancy, his drip paintings are hot garbage anyone with enough money to buy paint, a canvas and a brush can make "paintings" like his.

@@Matei1984 then pls, be my guest. Feel free to crate a dripping painting using your own ideas.

@@Matei1984 "anybody with enough time can just buy paint and a canvas and paint Mona Lisa"

@@primo4915 youre comparing diarrhea with a gourmet dinner

@@Matei1984 In visual arts there is no difference. Art is THE most subjective thing in the universe and simple labels like "good" and "bad" don't apply to it, you may not like the art but that doesn't mean it is objectively bad, because art is not objective.

I knew it had to be coming, and yet, it still got me

No, he's the opposite of commercial art--where you have to make art people would actually buy Not talk bullshit to recover a worthless painting

Idk, Kim jung gi does some commercial art for different people, and they came out amazing. I’m pretty sure he made a League of Legends mural of some sort

@@spoonerismstuff You right, i guess it depends

Enjoy your lunch

Enjoy your lunch

Enjoy your lunch

Bon appetit!

he got tha drip doe

And thats a fine opinion to have

Paint & canvas are too expensive to artistically vomit on. Wasting money to make a "statement" or get cheap reactions is disgusting.

I've realized that it is a conservative dogwhistle more than anything else. It's like they use it to automatically close off their minds to new ideas and expressions.

@@kayakat1869 you’ve been on the internet too long lol

@@emismith4655 if I was, I would be saying I hate modern art too.

@@kayakat1869 oh did you watch that Jacob Geller video too?

@@thepinkestpigglet7529 no, I may have seen a video about it, but it I kind of just remember realizing it one day.

But hey, its clear that he really wanted to do them. He clearly wasn't an incompetent purely abstract artist, his moves were intentional

Who would hand them in the living room? Living room art is supposed to be pleasing to the eye and inoffensive to guests.

@@thepinkestpigglet7529 if you like having a boring living room perhaps :P

ha, your comment reminded me what Pollock's 'work' looks like, some frustrated emotionally distraught child scribbing over, say a newspaper photograph. A while ago a graduate student scanned Pollock's work. Then with computer software eliminated each layer of paint, top to bottom, step by step until at the bottom was a representational image. Pollock's psychologist basically said the same. He starts with an image then props it up with random 'scaffolding'. Whelter its to hide, mar, or prop up something, don't know. But, something irritated him.