Who the #&%( is Jackson Pollock???(A student’s perspective)
If you have read previous post you are aware that this semester is going to be a handful, and since I am taking a nice variety of classes I am going to try something new. So I am starting * A student’s perspective* where I share my thoughts, opinions or add-on to things I am learning about in my various classes. I hope this catches on, and if any students out there would like to help me keep this growing feel free to contact me! (Oh, and I’m trying to make a button for it, anyone know of any good tutorials?)
Today’s post is brought to you from Introduction to art.
In class we watched a movie called: Who the #&$^ is Jackson Pollock.
It was quite an interesting movie that causes you to think about stereotypes and the way art is appraised and authenticated.
The premise of this movie is that a trucker, Teri Horton, finds an abstract painting at a thrift shop, she then purchases the painting for $5 dollars. One day when she goes to sell it at a garage sale an art teacher happens to see the painting and tells her that it might be a Jackson Pollock original, to which her reply was who the #*%@ is Jackson Pollock. The documentary then followed her journey to get the painting authenticated. It was claimed by scholars to be a fake, yet by forensics and fingerprints to be genuine. Despite forensics it is still looked at as a fake, and leads to an overarching message of what it takes to be accepted. The documentary raises the question: do the scholars really believe the work of art to be a fake or is it the person selling it and her means of obtaining the painting.
This leads me to my point, not on if I believe it is real or not—which I do believe it is—it is, it is to whom should we grant the higher power of belief: forensics or scholarly opinion. While an argument can be made for both, getting to the point, in this instance Forensics wins. Scholars have spent their lives building their expertise, and they do have greater knowledge on the subject matter than the majority of the population; however unlike scholars, forensics holds no bias. A fingerprint is a fingerprint, and after finding multiple matches on other works of art, it is hard to dismiss the facts.
It is bias and prejudice that is keeping this Pollock painting from gaining its rightly deserved authentic title. Who is a foul-mouthed trucker lady to find this painting, someone who knew nothing of him, someone without refined class? It is that exact belief that is keeping this painting from being authenticated.
So here is the run down almost all major art critics and the leading art authenticating board have declared the work of art which Teri Horton owns to be a fake; however, a paint fingerprint on the back of the canvas matches a finger print of a paint bucket in Pollock’s old studio as well as on two other authenticated Pollock paintings.
Bias is winning out here, and a woman is being judged rather than the work of art.
Teri’s photo is on the left an original Pollock is on the right.
Here is my digital Pollock
What do you think? I would love some thoughts and opinions. Comments are much welcomed and appreciated, oh, and as always they are returned.
Posted on February 7, 2011, in Uncategorized and tagged Abstractexpressionism, Art, Education, Fight for Pollock, Fingerprint, Forensic science, Jackson, Jacksonpollock, Paint, Pollock, Teri Horton, Visual Arts. Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.