A new research study has validated what critics of modern art have long claimed: that children can indeed paint like Jackson Pollock. However, the findings reveal that children actually produce artwork more similar to the famous abstract expressionist's style than adults do, according to research conducted by physicist Richard Taylor from the University of Oregon.
Jackson Pollock's painting "Number 17 A," featuring yellow, orange, red, and blue areas overlaid with dripped black and white lines, sold for $180 million at auction several years ago. The artist, who died nearly 70 years ago, created some of the world's most expensive artworks during the 1940s and 1950s. His distinctive style, known as "drip painting," involved dripping or pouring paint onto large canvases laid on the floor using brushes, sticks, or directly from paint cans.
Pollock's seemingly unpredictable method of applying paint became known as "Action Painting." Throughout his lifetime, his abstract expressionism faced repeated criticism, with detractors arguing that randomly splattering paint on canvas wasn't art and that "any child could do it." This common refrain about modern art has now been put to scientific scrutiny.
Taylor, who has studied Pollock's art extensively, discovered through his analyses that Pollock painted fractals – patterns that repeat at different scales, similar to natural phenomena like snowflakes, ferns, and trees. His interdisciplinary studies demonstrated that observing fractals, whether in nature or in Pollock's paintings, has a measurably calming effect on the human brain. This relaxation response, according to Taylor, stems less from learned aesthetic appreciation and more from an innate human connection to nature.
To test whether children could indeed replicate Pollock's technique, Taylor conducted experiments beginning in 2002. He invited 18 children aged four to six years old and 34 adults aged 18 to 25 to create paintings in Jackson Pollock's style by splashing diluted paint onto papers placed on the floor. The analysis of these artworks yielded surprising results that challenged conventional assumptions about artistic ability.
The children's paintings showed significantly different characteristics compared to those created by adults. Children produced smaller, more delicate patterns with greater spacing between colored areas and lines. In contrast, adult paintings exhibited higher color density and broader paint trajectories. The children's artworks featured simpler, one-dimensional flight paths that changed direction less frequently than the more varied trajectories seen in adult creations.
Most remarkably, the drip paintings produced by children were much closer to Pollock's original style than those created by older participants. While Taylor notes that children couldn't produce actual Pollock forgeries, their paintings were likely more aesthetically appealing than those made by adult amateur artists. This conclusion was supported by additional research examining the perceived complexity and visual appeal of some adult-created paintings.
The study's findings on aesthetic preference revealed that paintings with more space between elements and less complex fractal patterns were perceived as more pleasant to viewers. Children's artwork naturally exhibits these same qualities, even though the children's paintings weren't specifically analyzed for these aspects. The research team attributes this preference to familiarity, as fractal patterns appear in numerous variations throughout nature.
Taylor's ongoing research suggests that human visual systems have been fundamentally shaped by millions of years of exposure to fractals in natural landscapes. When the brain processes these visual patterns, it triggers a predominantly calming aesthetic response. This biological predisposition may explain why both Pollock's paintings and children's artwork, which share similar fractal characteristics, can be so visually compelling and emotionally soothing to viewers.
