I have a Rothko, but when I ordered I must have screwed up as it is only about 20 x 25. I thought it was going to be bigger.
It is this one -
I want to replace it, because of the size and because I want something new.
This is one I now want -
But the only size available is 9x12. I’ve looked on many sites. That is almost a joke. You would need binoculars to get immersed in that. I understand not everyone has the wall space for a movie poster sized print.
Or you could get some acrylic paint and make your own–it’s not as though there’s much to that. You’d seriously pay fifty bucks for a piece of paper with two color blocks on it? Takes all kinds I guess.
You are sure living up to your name. Yeah, right, your kid could do that. No, he couldn’t and if he could he would be 75 years too late. Could your kid influence countless artists that came after him? Would your kid paint something to cause this reaction?
*When I first looked at a Rothko, I was instantly captivated. I felt strong overwhelming emotions and a feeling of transcendence that I’ve experienced rarely. There was no rhyme or reason to my attraction towards it; there doesn’t need to be any. Sometimes, a painting’s job can just be to make a wall look better. Art’s primary function is to be admired. It doesn’t have to reveal a profound secret message to be worthy of appreciation.
*
You don’t get it or don’t like, well thanks for your opinion. This is not the pit so I will not anything else.
I’m an artist too. I’m never amazed at what I’ve sold, but I’m constantly amazed at the pieces that are collecting dust. I have one piece - my favorite - that everyone loves when they see it. But it hangs on the wall, unsold.
I can sympathize. My late wife’s first husband is a great artist, IMO, influenced by Rothko, and he has not sold very much. My stepson now owns several of his paintings. Maybe someday he will be discovered.
Could we see a picture of that favorite painting of yours?
Let me put it another way: I’m amazed anyone will give me money to play in oils and colors.
I have a 3ft × 5ft. Canvas I bought 4 years ago. So far it’s gessoed and has one 7in. black line toward the top off center. My sister tried to buy it from me. :smack:
Years ago, I was asked to submit material for a prospective new TV sketch comedy program. Because they paid by minutes of air time I didn’t self censor anything. I submitted everything that I wrote. Without fail, anything that I thought was clever and funny the producers rejected. All that they bought were things that I considered throwaways. It would have been interesting, if the show had made it past the pilot, to see if that trend continued.
Dad was a semi-pro photographer; I trained in his darkroom and worked (for money) in portraiture and journalism. My sisters are artists; one was well paid for her commercial work. We all prefer visual artworks whose orientation is fairly obvious. Influential abstracts are fine for those moved by such patterns. We love what grabs us.
One room here is filled with framed MC Escher prints, some extracted from poster books, and some undersize pieces I scanned, enlarged with warez, and printed at 24x14 inches on my trusty Canon S9000. That’s another way to obtain right-size prints - DIY.
You’ve been to the Rothko Chapel in Houston, right? If not, you should go. They’re just about done renovating it, I think. (Nope, still restoring it until June, virus mania permitting) The adjoining museum, The Menil Collection, is very much worth your time as well.
Most of Rothko’s work by itself doesn’t do much for me, but the Chapel with his work is an amazing, deeply moving place.
Rothko prints don’t do it for me, but Rothko paintings in person … holy shit. Spiritual. I haven’t had a chance to go to the Rothko chapel yet, but his work is especially something that needs to be seen in person.
Take your time and get one in the size and style you really want. No point wasting your money on cheap crap that doesn’t fit the bill. Been there, done that.
I would love to see a real Rothko in person. It’s on the bucket list.
Why the horizontal rectangles? It’s basically the human field of vision - horizontal rectangles (roughly).
Why the no identifiable structures? To remove the obstructions between the art and the viewer who would input their own semiotic preconceptions to a structure.
Seriously, not threadshitting. Can someone explain this to me? My husband and I are both artists, but neither of us would come up with this. I am not educated in art. Why is this Good?
