Fact of the day: Today is Jackson Pollock's birthday! Yay! I suggest we all gather at my house and dance around and throw paint onto canvases. (The funny thing is that you probably think I'm joking about this.)

For those not familiar with Pollock, here is one of his pieces, Lavender Mist:

And now that we're all on the same page as to who Jackson Pollock was. I feel like I need to impart a little wisdom about him. Most everyone who sees the above painting will say to themselves, "Hey, how the hell is that art? I mean a 3-year-old can throw paint on a canvas and make it look like that." I do not doubt that statement at all, but that is what abstract expressionism is all about. It has far more to do with the process by which the art is made than the ending result.

Plus, I must say that in order to fully appreciate the abstract expressionists (i.e. Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, Willem de Kooning, etc.) you have to see them in person. For those that do not understand this concept, I can explain it to you like going to the symphony: you can have a recording of a piece and then it's a completely different experience to go and hear that piece live, even if it is done by the same exact orchestra with the same exact conductor as your recording. There's far more to seeing any art form live than just seeing or hearing it: it's about the rest of the audience's reactions, it's how it works in the space, it's experiencing the art form rather than just being a well-read bystander.

Other abstract expressionists that I found along the wiki trail that I enjoy so far:

(left to right) Mark Tobey, Canticle, 1954; Hans Hofman, Color Poem No 6, 1954; Joan Mitchell, City Landscape, 1955