Framed |
Where the #$&!% is Jackson Pollock's Convergence?by Dean Brownrout |
|
|
One of the most well known and important paintings in the Albright-Knox Art Gallery collection is Jackson Pollock’s Convergence (1952). And gallery visitors with that awareness may have noticed recently that the painting is nowhere to be seen.
WHAT! Has the museum deaccessioned something else? Let the Wall Street Journal commentary and blogging begin.
Well, actually, the piece has been loaned out to the first major US exhibition in 20 years to address the Abstract Expressionist movement. Convergence, from our very own museum, is the centerpiece of this show.
Action/Abstraction: Pollock, de Kooning, and American Art, 1940-1976 is currently on view at the Jewish Museum in New York City, and travels next to the Saint Louis Art Museum. The Albright-Knox Art Gallery—and all of Western New York—will have the privilege of its presence from February 13 to May 31, 2009.
In reviewing the show, the New York Times’ Roberta Smith wrote “‘Convergence’ virtually explodes off the back wall…”
The exhibition contextualizes the artwork through the eyes of rival leading art critics of the period, Harold Rosenberg and Clement Greenberg. Greenberg’s support is widely acknowledged to have been the catalyst that turned Pollock into a household name.
The critics’ rivalry was in part based on their opposing ideas about Abstract Expressionism itself. Greenberg felt the movement was an extension of Modernism, while Rosenberg believed that it was a new and distinct form.
Convergence and de Kooning’s 1955 Gotham News (which is also owned by the Albright-Knox) are both featured on the cover of the accompanying 344-page catalogue. In addition, the book includes an essay by Douglas Dreishpoon, chief curator of the Albright-Knox and a curatorial consultant to the show.
Also included in the show from the Albright-Knox collection, are Arshile Gorky’s “The Liver is the Cock’s Comb,” 1944; and Jasper Johns’ “Numbers in Color,” 1958-59.
It is easy to take for granted the depth and importance of the Abstract Expressionist works at the heart of the Albright-Knox Art Gallery collection. Art-appreciating crowds in New York City are flocking to this show right now. When the show arrives here, and these works return to their home, it will serve to remind us of how lucky we are to have such a significant collection in our own backyard.
Reader Comments
bflofirst 11 Sep 2008, 13:57
I was almost happy there for a minute to think that the walls of the museum
could be once again available for art as opposed to paint splashes. come
on! How is this different than anything our kids have done with their Spin
Art kits. Spin Art with drugs and an odd personality thrown in and suddenly
it is art?
lana 11 Sep 2008, 20:51
bflofirst is unfortunately representative of the type of rube that
decorates their walls with sad-clown paintings and velvet elvis tapestries.
not that there's anything wrong with sad-clown paintings. certainly they're
easier to understand than abstract expressionism. here's a hint: read a
book. better yet, read wikipedia! it's watered down enough for someone with
the limited understanding of painting in context and history. you might
learn something! fun! here's a sample. oops, now you have to look up
'Clement Greenberg'. tricky. "Clement Greenberg supported Pollock's work on
formalistic grounds. It fit well with Greenberg's view of art history as
being about the progressive purification in form and elimination of
historical content. He therefore saw Pollock's work as the best painting of
its day and the culmination of the Western tradition going back via Cubism
and Cézanne to Monet."
Todd 16 Sep 2008, 17:38
all I know is that I miss the piece, as well as the other pieces mentioned,
when I visit the gallery. Its worth taking the time to enjoy
De 10 Nov 2008, 13:27
In response to bflofirst: It may be similar to a child's piece of work, it still plays a role in art. In fact anything can be art if one is willing to accept it. The movement gave another meaning in art because art comes from the heart or from the minds of humans that expresses their feelings or even their ideas. Art doesn't really have a meaning but the most common one is expressions of feelings brought to life in makings. Take an art appreciation class and you get a better understanding of the meaning of "art".
Deb
29 May 2009, 16:46
I AM taking an Art Appreciation in college.. and we happen to be studying
this piece. I really don't get Art Appreciation, I can look at a painting,
sculpture, photo, building (or whatever) and go "oooo pretty!!" I can see
how this is just a bunch of paint thrown around on a canvas, and I have
said the same thing "dang I wish I could throw paint and call it art and
make a bunch of money!" ... Truth is tho.. Pollock wasn't even all that
popular till after he died.. wasnt even rich... I agree with De.. "anything
can be art if one is willing to accept it"!!
Leave a Comment:
|
|
Issue Navigation> Issue Index > v7n37: In The Aftermath (9/11/08) > Where the #$&!% is Jackson Pollock's Convergence? This Week's Issue • Artvoice Daily • Artvoice TV • Events Calendar • Classifieds |
Subscribe 