Realism Vs. Abstract

By Chris Pearce

Jackson Pollack was a master of creating what he called "true art." What most of us would think we could do in preschool by finger painting and throwing paint onto a sheet of paper he was doing and in doing so, he created some of his masterpieces. The problem with Jackson Pollack's paintings is that critics believe what he calls art is not as appealing as Pollack would believe it to be. Some critics describe his work as not showing a message where humans can react with their emotions because it does not depict images of events.
In "Abstract art is not abstract and definitely not art" by Fred Ross, Mr. Ross looks as Jackson Pollack as not a true artist for Pollack does not take into account the work of past artists. In Fred Ross' point of view, Mr. Pollack does not show in his paintings works of art that can fully bring out emotion from the viewers that would make them able to relate to his work in lifelike events. Those who view Jackson Pollack's work may think of it as abstract art that is well crafted but as for drawing the viewer in and making them connect with the painting in some way emotionally, that can not be delivered. Fred Ross describes how emotions are felt through viewing paintings as “The greatest works explore beauty or tragedy in life." Maybe if a child in preschool were viewing Jackson Pollack's paintings they can relate more towards what he has been able to create emotionally than most adults when viewing his work.
There have been some critics who have embraced Jackson Pollacks work. "Towards a Newer Laocoon" by Clement Greenberg, Greenberg describes Jackson's work as being motivation for aspiring artists because of its abstractness. Greenberg believes most critics are scared of abstract art becoming to dominant from that of past artists. He describes how mediums are used more in a obvious manor than a traditional artists.
Greenberg may have a point in how when looking at an abstract piece of art, it may invoke more reactions because of the mediums used and how there isn't a direct story being painted, but I agree more with Fred Ross. Ross believes abstract art isn't as definitive of what art should be looked at for it does not correlate what an artist as taken from past artists added his or her own spice to it. Realism brings out a raw emotion that is drawn from the viewer when they try to distinguish what the artist point is of trying to get across to them. An abstract artist may try to deliver a certain message but can be misinterpreted more easily than a realist painting can be taken as. In regard to these essays, I believe I agree more with Fred Ross because of the fact that emotions can be correctly drawn from the viewer through realism than through abstract art.