Jackson Pollock Documentary: directed by Kim Evans, narrated by Melvyn
Bragg.
This documentary follows the life and work of Jackson
Pollock, from the perspective of some fellow artists, family and friends. It
offers some fascinating insights into his private life and how his early life and
family dynamics in the open planes and expansive skies of Kansas may have
influenced his work, style and development as an artist. His work seems clearly
influenced by his early life, as suggested by colleagues, in terms of his need
to work in big spaces and on large canvas. Family and friends repeatedly
described his conflicted and unstable relationship with others and with
alcohol. His personality and internal conflict drove his choice of expressionist
style and a desire to communicate pure emotion, particularly through his “drip
paintings”, as well as figurative work representing primitive images. He was
drawn to art and artists that integrated images and motives that linked with
his childhood familial and geographic environment.
From my perspective I think these personal reports are vital
to understand Pollock’s work, but alone, the outcome is too skewed. Additional perspectives from others that view
his work uninformed of his life could offer different visceral responses purely
to his art. Colin Marshall on the Open Culture site says: “Jackson Pollock
painted with the kind of visceral immediacy that frees you from having to know
much about his ideas, his methods, or his life.” (http://www.openculture.com/2012/12/a_portrait_of_jackson_pollock_presented_by_melvyn_bragg_1987.html
) The judgement about his work purely
from people who either loved him or hated aspects of him is polarised as his social
circle seemed to be, and Marshall’s comment summarises, for me, what may be
lacking in this documentary.
His love of nature
and the rawness of his experiences is well accounted in this documentary. This
is pertinently linked to his completed paintings and the way he painted, the
places he painted such as on the floor in the open air. No space was big enough
to hold his canvas in the same way that nowhere was big enough to hold him
psychologically without him bumping up painfully, against people and things.
The cultural context was also influential in his work and
way of life. America was emerging from a depression and changes in people’s
priorities and a need to express what was difficult to articulate found its way
into many of the contemporary artist’s art, method and perceptions of the
world. He had a group of people that he could identify with and “belong” to but
which also reinforced his risk taking. Risk taking and volatile outbursts
seemed to be endorsed as well as shied away from, perhaps exaggerating the
ambivalence and polarity that already seemed to be seated in his personality,
which may have added the necessary energy to produce the kind of art that he
was capable of. The particular narrative line taken in this documentary, leads
me to think that Jackson’s constant internal conflicts both fed the creation of
exceptional, ground-breaking work but also left him dissatisfied, self-doubting,
then rageful, soothed only by producing something sufficiently new. An artist’s quest
is usually to evolve. He compared himself to Picasso and Matisse but couldn’t
manage the internal containment of a big, demanding ego in the same way and
seemed to drive himself, literally into a wall. The essence that drove his
success also engineered his tragic end.
This documentary depicts this starkly with interviews from his lover and
close friends. As a documentary about his life and living, I think this is a
brilliant piece of work, but doesn’t necessarily offer the narrative and
structure to fully explore pure reactions to his work.