The colors in this painting contrast very well; I really like the black areas beneath the light colors on top. In addition, the mixed colors sprinkled in certain parts of the picture add to the main colors and make them more noticeable. It seems the more I stare at the painting the more colors I begin to find. This painting is like someone took some paint and decided to splash it everywhere; however, its recognition makes us believe otherwise. We generally associate paint splatter as a pretty simple task to accomplish. However, I believe one of the main reasons this particular painting has become so famous is because of the attention to color and detail/texture. For one, this painting almost looks 3D; the black sections resemble shadows of the lighter painted sections which gives it a 3D appearance and drives the observer to question if it is really paint or something else completely different. Also, if it is paint, the order the colors are layered on must have been very carefully planned; this is why it seems to be a more challenging task than simply splattering paint randomly on a piece of paper.
The fact that this painting is actually about 6 feet tall most definitely changes the way one looks at it. First off, it makes the painting even more mysterious and questionable. Just observing the painting on a computer screen makes me see many different possible creations. From one perspective it resembles a highway with each line representing a different road and pathway; the little spots of colors are like little towns along the way. The fact that we will feel like midgets standing next to this painting completely alters the perspective we have as we look at it. Once more, it makes a simple painting splatter appear much more complex and interactive than we originally expected.
Sullivan believes that what gives this painting purpose is its simplicity. She compares it to “Monopoly without any bank” meaning its life is not driven by money or anything, it is merely there, still in the moment. There is nothing spectacular in the painting. It has no name, yet it resembles that “in a dream” or “inside of the mind.” There is something about its pure and simple texture that makes one feel marvelous. Oxymoron is present here: plain and spectacular. The painting is boringly intriguing and this is what seems to ultimately capture its audience’s attention. In conclusion, I believe Sullivan is still wondering herself what the reason for the painting is. Maybe our unanswered questions is its importance: we are left to decipher on our own. Further more, maybe we are just as simple as the painting appears to be on the outside but there is much more going on underneath.
It is interesting because Sullivan and I appreciated this painting for completely opposite reasons. I touched on its depth of detail and color that seems difficult to duplicate. I mentioned there is more to the painting, physically, than the streaks of paint we see. Sullivan, instead, emphasized its importance because of the fact that it is simply made; this simplicity is what gives it meaning. I originally believed its meaning came from the complexity that requires more than one glance to recognize.