MovieChat Forums > Who the #$&% Is Jackson Pollock? (2006) Discussion > Why I believe:

Why I believe:

posted 16 years ago by chainmail311
5 replies | jump to latest

Since going to the Museum of Modern art at age 3 in Washington DC, I've had a fond love of the counterculture and simplicity of Modern Art. I was obsessed with it as a youth, and it comes through to this day. Being somewhat of an artist myself, I have an insight that hasn't been mentioned before in the film, or on the boards.

Not everything I do is "Ethan". I have many works I've simply trashed because I can and will give up on a piece. If I get really frustrated with how I can't get something right, I'll toss it like it was just an afterthought.

When I put effort, time and thought into a piece, it respectfully will represent my talent and abilities, and I am satisfied in claiming that piece. I draw tons of doodles a day, mostly without forethought. They usually end up in the trash.

I also play guitar, and sometimes I just play to hear the notes and where my fingers lead on the neck of the guitar. It's not "Ethan" when I play something out of my fingers. It's when I sit down and "write". That's when "Ethan" comes out, and each song can be labeled as such.

This is why I think it's a Pollock. I don't think it's his best, but the forensics clearly state it's authenticity. Doesn't mean it's his best work, but I believe it was created with his hands.

Remember, God created Man and Woman, but he also created the dung beetle.

[–] Applejackson75 16 years ago

Who the *beep* is "Ethan"?

[–] Patricia-14 15 years ago

I actually think it's quite lovely. I would call it one of his best. And I think you'd have to be a fool (or a pompous ass, as we saw all-too-much of in that film) to continue saying it's not a genuine Pollack with all the very solid evidence to the contrary.

[–] orangeandyellow 15 years ago

very well put.

i tend to think that it was one of his rejects that was discarded and then later found by someone who did not realize who jackson pollock was.

maybe my opinion is biased since i have watched the film and know the controversy but i don't find this piece to be on the same level as the others, but i would imagine that is why it ended up as it did.

[–] mel2000 8 years ago

...but the forensics clearly state it's authenticity.

The forensics of the painting remain highly disputed.

[–] cocacolaistherealthing 7 years ago

I like this.

I agree. People have a tendency to view artists through their good work and only their good work. It surprises a lot of people to know that F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote around twenty books and not just The Great Gatsby and The Beautiful and the Damned. Art takes a lot of work. Not everything is exceptional or aligns with the reductive definitions of what is a Jackson Pollock or an Andy Warhol.

I'm pretty convinced the painting is a Pollock, but I think this assumption is colored by my want for the jerk experts to be wrong and my preference for Pollock's more colorful work, of which--if it's real--Teri Horton's is an example.