[Arkinsaw]

Depends on what is considered beauty.

Most minimalist art I consider absolutely worthless. But then there is the one that is just a simple curved black line, but you recognize that this is the minimum necessary to evoke the shape, and thought, of a woman. Just a simple black line, but beautiful in its way. Similarly, I have seen one that is just some smudges, but it is recognizable as the minimum form necessary to describe a sea shore.

I used to consider Jackson Pollock's work absolutely worthless and paid little attention to them at all. But, later studies have posited that they have a fractal nature not found in attempted duplications. I haven't really made a decision about what I think of Pollock, but it made me at least take a look and see if there is any there there.

[the invisib1e hand]

Depends on what is considered beauty.

[angry, loud buzz.]
[loud, crashing gong.]
[...large hook emerging from stage left...]
[...three-second-delay utilized to cut to commercial...]

in other words, buh--freeking--osh.

[tbpiper]

Most minimalist art I consider absolutely worthless.

In the summer of 2007, my wife & I visited the art museum in Minneapolis. In the modern art section was a 'painting' I thought for an instant was a joke. It was a blank canvas. And it was a genuine display. Some people just put too much credence in the ethereal nature of art.

[truth_seeker]

“I haven’t really made a decision about what I think of Pollock, but it made me at least take a look and see if there is any there there.”

I don’t know if he mixed his drinking with his artwork.

I find some of his canvases pleasing to the eye. Interesting colors. Interesting textures. Interesting shapes.