I’m not sure what specifically you think you’re disagreeing with me about because I don’t see what you’re saying as incompatible with what I said. Communication with oneself or the rest of the art world is still communication.
What makes Pollock’s art “art” is the context in which it was created. It’s not like One: Number 31, 1950 would have the same reputation today if you sent it back a couple centuries in a time machine. It’s appreciated because it’s part of an ongoing conversation.
Comments
I’m not sure what specifically you think you’re disagreeing with me about because I don’t see what you’re saying as incompatible with what I said. Communication with oneself or the rest of the art world is still communication.
What makes Pollock’s art “art” is the context in which it was created. It’s not like One: Number 31, 1950 would have the same reputation today if you sent it back a couple centuries in a time machine. It’s appreciated because it’s part of an ongoing conversation.