Explain Mark Rothko paintings

[Zoot Allures]

I do not get it
Anyone could doit

Mark Rothko is known for his color field paintings that depicted irregular and painterly rectangular regions of color, which he produced from 1949 to 1970. Although Rothko did not personally subscribe to any one school, he is associated with the American abstract expressionism movement of modern art.


Black on maroon




black on grey



Yellow and Blue




Blue and Grey

 

[anon1]

His mom bought it.

 

[bazokajoe]

It's not worth 87 cents.

 

[Butler1000]

Honestly they are a tax haven for the rich. They trade various art workvia auction, in many cases just storing them.

They are worth that much because rich people want them to be.

 

[Robert Mugabe]

Still wondering about this one

Canadians Incensed by Purchase of U.S. Art : Art: Ottawa's National Gallery spent $1.5 million on a Barnett Newman abstract. The community protests that the money could have been spent in support of Canada. - Los Angeles Times

 

[Valcazar]

Still wondering about this one

Canadians Incensed by Purchase of U.S. Art : Art: Ottawa's National Gallery spent $1.5 million on a Barnett Newman abstract. The community protests that the money could have been spent in support of Canada. - Los Angeles Times



View attachment 411824

It's a pretty cool effect.
But Butler's comment that it is worth that much because someone will pay that much is true.

 

[JackBurton]

I dunno if it’s worth 87 million but if you are ever in Houston, you should go to the Rothko Chapel. It’s a very quiet and sadly beautiful place when you realize he killed himself a year before it opened. He never got to see it completed.

It’s a very emotionally moving place. +1

 

[jalimon]

Darn I can do that!

87 million would be handy right now.

 

[gar]

Still wondering about this one

Canadians Incensed by Purchase of U.S. Art : Art: Ottawa's National Gallery spent $1.5 million on a Barnett Newman abstract. The community protests that the money could have been spent in support of Canada. - Los Angeles Times



View attachment 411824

it was commissioned in 1967 for 1.8 million and was valued at 40 million in 2014. Not a bad investment. I remember reading that the gallery actually displayed the painting upside down for years.

 

[Mozo]

it was commissioned in 1967 for 1.8 million and was valued at 40 million in 2014. Not a bad investment. I remember reading that the gallery actually displayed the painting upside down for years.

If you can't afford a Rothko, read this book. It is a masterpiece.

Bluebeard (Vonnegut novel) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[rgkv]

They are easier to explain if you shut your mind, and your eyes

 

[Robert Mugabe]

that is not Rothko painting

No flies on you. As I pointed out it is a Barnet Newman painting.

 

[Zoot Allures]

Merci beaucoup


While I still do not get it. I now understand that Rothko is real, which is something I wondered about. Why try to understand an artist when there is nothing to be understood?
So, one first must decide if the art is genuine

Rothko considers those who look at his paintings and do not get it are commiting blasphemy as it is a religious experience and few get it

His pure abstract work is meant to provoke deep feelings beyond mental construct, that is why you have no mental reference to attach to the art unlike picasso and others. If you had a mental reference it would not be pure abstractism by definition

Maybe I should go to the AGO and look at one of his paintings for a few hours while smoking something.

They are currently hosting a display of modernism

No.1, White and Red, 1962. Oil on canvas, is being hung

 

[Zoot Allures]

it was commissioned in 1967 for 1.8 million and was valued at 40 million in 2014. Not a bad investment. I remember reading that the gallery actually displayed the painting upside down for years.

Not quite

They thought it was upside down so they rehung it and now it is upside down