His art has no intrinsic meaning, anyway. That's one of the reasons it sucks as art.
Art, at it's basis, is a means of communication, a transfer of message and evoked emotion from the artist to the viewer. Pollack and the rest if the trendy of his time strove to remove all message from their art, and leave it up to the viewer to get whatever he could out of it.
Pollock's works are art at about the level of a teenager screaming "You just don't understand me!!!!" is a conversation. Trite, shallow, repetitive, unproductive, masturbatory and one-sided.
But the hostility is less directed at Pollack than at the waste of time and dead end pursuits it has sent the "Fine Art" world off in for 70 years.