The Legacy of Jackson Follock

(1958)
The rragic nevs of Fol l ock' s dearh r vo summers ago vas prof oundl y
depressi ng ro many of us. We felr nor onl y a sadness over rhe dearh of
a grear figure, Lur also a deep loss, as i f somerhi ng of ourselves had
di ed roo. We vere a piece of hi m: he vas, perhaps, rhe emLodi menr
of our amLi r i on for aLsolure l i Lerari on and a secrerly cheri shed vi s h
ro overr urn ol d raLles of crockery and flar champagne. We sav i n his
exampl e rhe possiLiliry of an asroundi ng freshness, a sorr of ecsraric
Llindness.
Bur rhere vas anorher, mor Li d, side ro his meaningfulness. To ' di e
ar rhe r op' for Lei ng his ki nd of moder n arrisr vas ro many, I r hi nk,
i mpl i ci r i n rhe vor k Lefore he di ed. Ir vas rhis Li zarre i mpl i car i on rhar
vas so movi ng. We rememLered van Go g h and Ri mLa ud. Bur nov ir
vas our ri me, and a man some of us knev. Thi s ul ri mare sacrificial
aspecr of Lei ng an arrisr, vhi l e nor a nev idea, seemed i n Fol l ock
rerri Ll y moder n, and i n hi m rhe sraremenr and rhe ri r ual vere so grand,
so aurhori rari ve and al l -encompassi ng i n rheir scale and dar i ng rhar,
vharever our privare convi cri ons, ve coul d nor fail ro Le affecred Ly
rheir spirir.
Ir vas proLaLl y rhis sacrificial side of Fol l ock rhar lay ar rhe roor
of our depression. Fol l ock' s rragedy vas more suLrle rhan his dearh:
for he di d nor die ar rhe rop. We coul d nor avoi d seeing rhar dur i ng
rhe lasr five years of his life his srrengrh had veakened, and dur i ng
rhe lasr rhree he had hardl y vor ked ar al l . Tho ug h everyone knev, i n
rhe l i ghr of reason, rhar rhe man vas very i l l (his dearh vas perhaps a
respire f r om almosr cerrain furure suffering) and rhar he di d nor die as
Srravinsky' s ferriliry mai dens di d, i n rhe very momenr of crear i on/
anni hi l ar i ons r i l l ve coul d nor escape rhe di s r urLi ng (meraphysical)
i rch rhar connecred rhis dearh i n some direcr vay vi r h arr. A n d rhe
i
T H E F I F T I E S
connecr i on, rarher rhan Lei ng cl i macr i c, vas, i n a vay, i ngl ori ous. If
rhe end had ro come, ir came ar rhe vr ong r i me.
Was ir nor perfecrly clear rhar moder n arr i n general vas sl i ppi ng!
Ei r her ir had Lecome dul l and reperirious as rhe ' advanced' sryle, or
large numLers of formerl y commi r r ed conremporary painrers vere
defecri ng ro earlier forms. Ame r i c a vas cel eLrari ng a 'sani ry i n arr '
movemenr , and rhe flags vere our. Thus , ve reasoned, Fol l ock vas
rhe cenrer i n a grear fai l ure: rhe Ne v Ar r . Hi s heroic srand had Leen
furile. Rarher rhan releasing rhe freedom rhar ir ar firsr promi s ed, ir
caused nor onl y a loss of pover and possiLle di si l l usi onmenr for Fol -
l ock Lur also rhar rhe j i g vas up. A n d rhose of us sri l l resisranr ro rhis
r rur h voul d end rhe same vay, hardl y ar rhe rop. Such vere our
rhoughrs i n Augus r 1956.
Bur over r vo years have passed. Wha r ve felr rhen vas genui ne
enough, Lur our rri Lure, i f ir vas rhar ar al l , vas a l i mi r ed one. Ir vas
surely a mani fesrly human reacrion on rhe parr of rhose of us vho
vere devored ro rhe mosr advanced arrisrs around us and vho felr rhe
shock of Lei ng r hr ovn our on our ovn. Bur ir di d nor seem rhar
Fol l ock had i ndeed accompl i shed somer hi ng, Lorh Ly his arrirude and
Ly his very real gifrs, rhar venr Leyond even rhose values recogni zed
and acknovl edged Ly sensirive arrisrs and crirics. The acr of pai nr i ng,
rhe nev space, rhe personal mar k rhar Lui l ds irs ovn f or m and mean-
i ng, rhe endless rangle, rhe grear scale, rhe nev marerials are Ly nov
cliches of college arr deparrmenrs. The i nnovari ons are accepred. They
are Lecomi ng parr of rexrLooks.
Bur some of rhe i mpl i cari ons i nherenr i n rhese nev values are nor
as furile as ve al l Legan ro Lelieve, rhis ki nd of pai nr i ng need nor Le
cal l ed rhe rragic sryle. No r al l rhe roads of rhis moder n arr lead ro ideas
of finaliry. I hazard rhe guess rhar Fol l ock may have vaguely sensed
rhis Lur vas unaLl e, Lecause of illness or for orher reasons, ro do
anyr hi ng aLour ir.
H e creared some magni fi cenr pai nri ngs. Bur he also desrroyed
pai nr i ng. If ve exami ne a fev of rhe i nnovari ons menr i oned aLove, ir
may Le possiLle ro see vhy rhis is so.
For insrance, rhe acr of pai nr i ng. In rhe lasr sevenry-five years rhe
r andom play of rhe hand upon rhe canvas or paper has Lecome i n-
creasingly i mporr anr . Srrokes, smears, lines, dors Lecame less and less
!"
T H E L E GAC Y OF J ACKS ON F OL L OCK
Fi g. 1 Jackson I'ollock in his srudio, 1950.! "#$%$&'()#! *+!,(-.! /(01%#2!
arrached ro represenred oLjecrs and exisred more and more on rheir
o vn, self-sufficienrly. Bur f r om Impressi oni sm up ro, say, Gor ky, rhe
idea of an ' or der ' ro rhese marki ngs vas expl i ci r enough. Even Dada,
vhi c h purporr ed ro Le free of such considerarions as ' compos i r i on, '
oLeyed rhe CuLi s r esrheric. One col ored shape Lalanced (or modi f i ed
or srimulared) orhers, and rhese i n r urn vere played off againsr (or
vi r h) rhe vhol e canvas, r aki ng i nro accounr irs size and shapef or
rhe mosr parr quire consciously. In shorr, parr-ro-vhol e or parr-ro-parr
relarionships, no marrer hov srrained, vere a good 50 percenr of rhe
ma ki ng of a picrure (mosr of rhe ri me rhey vere a lor more, mayLe 90
percenr). Wi r h Fol l ock, hovever, rhe so-called dance of dr i ppi ng,
3
T H E FI FTI ES
sl ashi ng, squeezi ng, dauLi ng, and vharever else venr i nro a vor k
placed an almosr aLsolure value upon a diarisri c gesrure. He vas en-
couraged i n rhis Ly rhe Surrealisr painrers and poers, Lur nexr ro his
rheir vor k is consisrenrly ' ar r f ul , ' 'arranged, ' and f ul l of finesse
aspecrs of ourer conr rol and r rai ni ng. Wi r h rhe huge canvas placed
upon rhe floor, rhus ma ki ng ir difficulr for rhe arrisr ro see rhe vhol e
or any exrended secrion of 'parrs, ' Fol l ock coul d r rur hf ul l y say rhar
he vas ' i n ' his vor k. Her e rhe direcr appl i cari on of an auromari c
approach ro rhe acr makes ir clear rhar nor onl y is rhis nor rhe ol d crafr
of pai nr i ng, Lur ir is perhaps Lorderi ng on ri rual irself, vhi c h happens
ro use pai nr as one of irs marerials. ( The Eur opean Surrealisrs may
have used aur omar i sm as an i ngredi enr, Lur ve can hardl y say rhey
really pracriced ir vhol ehearredl y. In facr, onl y rhe vri rers among
r he ma nd onl y i n a fev i nsrancesenj oyed any success i n rhis vay.
In rerrospecr, mosr of rhe Surrealisr painrers appear ro have deri ved
f r om a psychology Look or f r om each orher: rhe empry visras, rhe Lasic
nar ural i s m, rhe sexual fanrasies, rhe Lleak surfaces so characrerisric of
rhis peri od have impressed mosr Ame r i c a n arrisrs as a col l ecri on of
unconvi nci ng cliches. Ha r dl y auromari c, ar rhar. A n d , more rhan rhe
orhers associared vi r h rhe Surrealisrs, such real ralenrs as Ficasso, Kl ee,
and Mi r o Lel ong ro rhe srricrer di sci pl i ne of CuLi s m, perhaps rhis is
vhy rheir vor k appears ro us, paradoxi cal l y, more free. Surreal i sm
arrracred Fol l ock as an arrirude rarher rhan as a col l ecri on of arrisric
examples.)
Bur I used rhe vords 'al mosr aLsol ure' vhen I spoke of rhe di ari s-
ric gesrure as disrincr f rom rhe process of j udgi ng each move upon rhe
canvas. Fol l ock, i nr errupr i ng his vor k, voul d judge his 'acrs' very
shrevdl y and carefully for l ong periods Lefore goi ng i nro anorher
'acr. ' He knev rhe difference Lerveen a good gesrure and a Lad one.
Thi s vas his conscious arrisrry ar vor k, and ir makes hi m a parr of
rhe r radi r i onal communi r y of painrers. Yer rhe disrance Lerveen rhe
relarively self-conrained vorks of rhe Europeans and rhe seemi ngly
chaoric, s pr avl i ng vorks of rhe Amer i c a n indicares ar Lesr a renuous
connecri on ro 'pai nr i ngs. ' (In facr, Jackson Fol l ock never really had a
!"#$%&'() sensiLiliry. The painrerly aspecrs of his conremporari es, such
as Mor he r ve l l , Ho f ma nn, de Kooni ng , Ror hko, and even Sr i l l , poi nr
up ar one momenr a deficiency i n hi m and ar anorher momenr a l i L-
erari ng fearure. I choose ro consider rhe second elemenr rhe i mporr anr
one.)
4
T H E L E G A C Y OF J ACKS ON F OL L OCK
I am convi nced rhar ro grasp a Fol l ock' s i mpacr properl y, ve musr
Le acroLars, consranrly shur r l i ng Lerveen an i denri fi cari on vi r h rhe
hands and Lody rhar flung rhe painr and srood ' i n ' rhe canvas and
suLmi ssi on ro rhe oLjecrive mar ki ngs , al l ovi ng rhem ro enrangle and
assaulr us. Thi s insraLiliry is i ndeed far f r om rhe idea of a ' compl er e'
pai nr i ng. The arrisr, rhe specraror, and rhe ourer vor l d are muc h roo
i nrerchangeaLl y i nvol ved here. ( And i f ve oLjecr ro rhe di ffi cul ry of
compl ere comprehensi on, ve are as ki ng roo lirrle of rhe arr.)
The n F o r m. To f ol l ov ir, ir is necessary ro ger r i d of rhe usual idea
of ' F o r m, ' i.e., a Legi nni ng, mi ddl e, and end, or any varianr of rhis
pr i nc i pl es uc h as fragmenrari on. We do nor enrer a pai nr i ng of Fol -
lock' s i n any one place (or hundr ed places). Anyvher e is everyvhere,
and ve di p i n and our vhen and vhere ve can. Thi s discovery has led
ro remarks rhar his arr gives rhe i mpressi on of goi ng on f orevera
rrue i nsi ghr rhar suggesrs hov Fol l ock i gnored rhe confines of rhe
recrangular field i n favor of a conr i nuum goi ng i n al l di recri ons si-
mul raneousl y,* +$,-./ rhe l i reral di mensi ons of any vor k. ( Though
evidence poinrs ro a sl ackeni ng of rhe arrack as Fol l ock came ro rhe
edges of many of his canvases, i n rhe Lesr ones he compensared for
rhis Ly r acki ng muc h of rhe painred surface around rhe Lack of his
srrerchers.) The four sides of rhe pai nr i ng are rhus an aLrupr l eavi ng
off of rhe acriviry, vhi c h our i magi nari ons conri nue our var d i ndef i -
nirely, as r hough refusing ro accepr rhe arri fi ci al i ry of an ' endi ng. ' In
an ol der vor k, rhe edge vas a far more precise caesura: here ended
rhe vor l d of rhe arrisr, Leyond Legan rhe vor l d of rhe specraror and
'real i r y. '
We accepr rhis i nnovar i on as val i d Lecause rhe arrisr undersrood
vi r h perfecr naruralness ' hov ro do i r . ' Empl oyi ng an irerarive pr i n-
ci pl e of a fev hi ghl y charged elemenrs consranrly undergoi ng vari ari on
( i mprovi s i ng, as i n much As i an musi c), Fol l ock gives us an all-over
uni r y and ar rhe same ri me a means ro respond conri nuousl y ro a
freshness of personal choice. Bur rhis f or m al l ovs us equal pleasure i n
parr i ci par i ng i n a del i r i um, a deadeni ng of rhe reasoni ng faculries, a
loss of ' s el f ' i n rhe Wesrern sense of rhe r erm. Thi s srrange comLi -
nari on of exrreme i ndi vi dual i r y and selflessness makes rhe vor k re-
mar kaLl y porenr Lur also indicares a proLaLl y larger frame of psycho-
l ogi cal reference. A n d for rhis reason any allusions ro Fol l ock' s Lei ng
rhe maker of gi anr rexrures are compl erel y incorrecr. They miss rhe
poi nr, and mi sundersr andi ng is Lound ro fol l ov.
T H E FI FTI ES
Bur gi ven rhe proper approach, a medi um- s i zed exhi Li r i on space
vi r h rhe valls rorally covered Ly Fol l ocks offers rhe mosr compl ere and
meani ngf ul sense of his arr possiLle.
The n Scale. Fol l ock' s choice of enormous canvases served many
purposes, chi ef of vhi c h for our discussion is rhar his mural-scal e
pai nri ngs ceased ro Lecome painrings and Lecame envi ronmenr s. Be-
fore a pai nr i ng, our size as specrarors, i n relarion ro rhe size of rhe
pi crure, prof oundl y influences hov muc h ve are vi l l i ng ro give up
consciousness of our r emporal exisrence vhi l e experi enci ng ir. Fol -
lock' s choice of grear sizes resulred i n our Lei ng conf ronred, assaulred,
sucked i n. Yer ve musr nor confuse rhe effecr of rhese vi r h rhar of rhe
hundreds of large painrings done i n rhe Renaissance, vhi c h gl ori f i ed
an i deal i zed everyday vor l d f ami l i ar ro rhe oLserver, ofren conr i nui ng
rhe acrual r oom inro rhe pai nr i ng Ly means of r rompe l ' oei l . Fol l ock
offers us no such f ami l i ari ry, and our everyday vor l d of convenr i on
and haLir is replaced Ly rhe one creared Ly rhe arrisr. Reversi ng rhe
aLove procedure, rhe pai nr i ng is conr i nued our i nro rhe r oom. A n d
rhis leads me ro my final poi nr: Space. The space of rhese crearions is
nor clearly palpaLle as such. We can Lecome enrangl ed i n rhe veL ro
some exrenr and Ly movi ng i n and our of rhe skein of lines and splash-
ings can experience a ki nd of sparial exrension. Bur even so, rhis space
is an al l usi on far more vague rhan even rhe fev inches of space-reading
a CuLi s r vor k affords. Ir may Le rhar our need ro i denri fy vi r h rhe
process, rhe ma ki ng of rhe vhol e affair, prevenrs a concenrrari on on
rhe specifics of Lefore and Lehi nd so i mporr anr i n a more r radi r i onal
arr. Bur vhar I Lelieve is clearly di scerni Ll e is rhar rhe enrire pai nr i ng
comes our ar us (ve are parricipanrs rarher rhan oLservers), ri ghr i nro
rhe r oom. Ir is possiLle ro see i n rhis connecri on hov Fol l ock is rhe
r ermi nal resulr of a gradual rrend rhar moved f r om rhe deep space of
rhe fifreenrh and sixreenrh cenruries ro rhe Lui l di ng our f r om rhe canvas
of rhe CuLi s r collages. In rhe presenr case rhe ' pi cr ur e' has moved so
far our rhar rhe canvas is no longer a reference poi nr. Hence, al r hough
up on rhe val l , rhese marks surround us as rhey di d rhe painrer ar
vor k, so srricr is rhe correspondence achieved Lerveen his i mpul se and
rhe resulranr arr.
Wha r ve have, rhen, is arr rhar rends ro lose irself our of Lounds,
rends ro fill our vor l d vi r h irself, arr rhar i n meani ng, l ooks, i mpul se
seems ro Lreak fairly sharply vi r h rhe rradirions of painrers Lack ro ar
leasr rhe Greeks . Fol l ock' s near desrrucri on of rhis r radi r i on may vel l
!"
T H E L E GAC Y OF J ACKS ON F OL L OCK
Le a rer urn ro rhe poi nr vhere arr vas more acrively i nvol ved i n ri r ual ,
magi c, and life rhan ve have kno vn ir i n our recenr pasr. I f so, ir is
an exceedingly i mporr anr srep and i n irs superi or vay offers a sol uri on
ro rhe compl ai nrs of rhose vho voul d have us pur a Lir of life i nro arr.
Bur vhar do ve do nov!
Ther e are r vo alrernarives. One is ro conri nue i n rhis vei n. Fr oL-
aLly many good 'near-pai nr i ngs' can Le done varyi ng rhis esrheric of
Fol l ock' s vi r hour deparri ng f rom ir or goi ng furrher. The orher is ro
give up rhe ma ki ng of pai nri ngs enr i rel yI mean rhe single flar rec-
rangle or oval as ve knov ir. Ir has Leen seen hov Fol l ock came prerry
close ro doi ng so himself. In rhe process, he came upon some never
values rhar are exceedingly difficulr ro discuss yer Lear upon our pres-
enr alrernarive. To say rhar he discovered rhings l i ke marks, gesrures,
pai nr, colors, hardness, sofrness, f l ovi ng, sroppi ng, space, rhe vor l d,
life, dearh mi ghr sound naive. Every arrisr vor r h his salr has 'di scov-
er ed' rhese rhi ngs. Bur Fol l ock' s discovery seems ro have a pecul i arl y
fascinaring si mpl i ci r y and direcrness aLour ir. He vas, for me, amaz-
i ngl y chi l dl i ke, capaLle of Lecomi ng i nvol ved i n rhe sruff of his arr as
a gr oup of concrere facrs seen for rhe firsr ri me. Ther e is, as I said
earlier, a cerrain Llindness, a mure Lel i ef i n everyrhi ng he does, even
up ro rhe end. I urge rhar rhis nor Le seen as a si mpl e issue. Fev
i ndi vi dual s can Le l ucky enough ro possess rhe inrensiry of rhis ki nd
of knovi ng , and I hope rhar i n rhe near furure a careful srudy of rhis
(perhaps) Ze n qual i ry of Fol l ock' s personaliry vi l l Le underraken. A r
any rare, for nov ve may consider rhar, excepr for rare insrances,
Wesrern arr rends ro need many more i ndi recri ons i n achi evi ng irself,
pl aci ng more or less equal emphasis upon ' r hi ngs ' and rhe relarions
Lerveen r hem. The crudeness of Jackson Fol l ock is nor, rherefore,
uncour h, ir is manifesrly frank and uncul ri vared, unsul l i ed Ly r rai ni ng,
rrade secrers, finessea direcrness rhar rhe European arrisrs he l i ked
hoped for and parri al ly succeeded i n Lur rhar he never had ro srrive
afrer Lecause he had ir Ly narure. Thi s Ly irself voul d Le enough ro
reach us somerhi ng.
Ir does. Fol l ock, as I see hi m, lefr us ar rhe poi nr vhere ve musr
Lecome preoccupi ed vi r h and even dazzl ed Ly rhe space and oLjecrs
of our everyday life, eirher our Lodies, clorhes, rooms, or, i f need Le,
rhe vasrness of Forry-second Srreer. Nor sarisfied vi r h rhe suggesrion
r hrough painr of our orher senses, ve shall ur i l i ze rhe specific suL-
srances of sighr, sound, movemenrs, people, odors, rouch. OLj ecrs of
7
T H E L E GAC Y OF J ACKS ON F OL L OCK
every sorr are marerials for rhe nev arr: pai nr, chairs, f ood, elecrric and
neon l i ghrs, smoke, varer, ol d socks, a dog, movi es, a rhousand orher
rhings rhar vi l l Le discovered Ly rhe presenr generarion of arrisrs. No r
onl y vi l l rhese Lol d crearors shov us, as* &0 l or rhe firsr ri me, rhe vor l d
ve have alvays had aLour us Lur i gnored, Lur rhey vi l l disclose enrirely
unheard-of happeni ngs and evenrs, f ound i n garLage cans, police files,
horel loLLies, seen i n srore vi ndovs and on rhe srreers, and sensed i n
dreams and horri Ll e accidenrs. A n odor of crushed srravLerries, a
lerrer f r om a f ri end, or a Li l l Loard sel l i ng Dr a no, rhree raps on rhe
fronr door, a scrarch, a si gh, or a voice l ecr uri ng endlessly, a Ll i ndi ng
sraccaro flash, a Lovl er har al l vi l l Lecome marerials for rhis nev
concrere arr.
Young arrisrs of roday need no longer say, 'I am a pai nr er' or 'a
poer' or 'a dancer. ' They are si mpl y 'arrisrs. ' A l l of life vi l l Le open
ro r hem. They vi l l discover our of ordi nary rhings rhe meani ng of
ordi nari ness. They vi l l nor rry ro make rhem exrraordi nary Lur vi l l
onl y srare rheir real meani ng. Bur our of nor hi ng rhey vi l l devise rhe
exrraordi nary and rhen mayLe norhingness as vel l . Feople vi l l Le
del i ghred or horri f i ed, crirics vi l l Le confused or amused, Lur rhese, I
a m cerrai n, vi l l Le rhe alchemies of rhe 1960s.