I like all kinds of art, but I just don’t get the Rothko stuff.
And somebody paid $80 mil for one of his works. 
BTW, I am talking about the square/rectangle stuff, not his earlier work.
Emperor’s New Clothes. Rothko makes Pollack look like an Old Master.
At least Pollack showed creativity .
I honestly thought it was all bullshit until I actually saw it in person. I can’t explain it, but I love it. Of course, I’m not gonna pay 80 mil for it.
Bert Cooper likes it.
This. I wouldn’t pay $80 million for it, but I did pay twelve bucks to see the Rothko Room at DC’s Phillips Gallery. The Rothko Room | The Phillips Collection . Absolutely worth the money, even if this had been the only thing I looked at in the Phillips. (It wasn’t, of course). I’d be hard-pressed to articulate why these paintings are so interesting, but they absolutely are interesting in person. Poster prints are uniformly boring, though.
What enalzi said. Much of his art doesn’t look like much on paper. You have to see it in person to see why it gets so many people excited. It’s hard to describe, but for many people some pieces feel like a doorway to the edge of the universe.
I don’t have any special liking for Rothko or any of that era, but it’s okay. We saw Red in a small-stage theater and the faux works on stage dwarfed the audience.
I remember going to a Rothko exhibition in London, the Tate if I remember, and my friend became quite emotional in one of the dark rooms surrounded by his works. So obviously there is something visceral in his work that speaks to some.
Didn’t chime in the same way for me. Pollock however…
I’ve seen it in person, looks the same to me as on a website
I don’t think it’s all bullshit, as I wouldn’t make that judgement without seeing his work in person. If I ever do, though, I have a feeling I will love it. Simon Schama’s “The Power of Art” has on episode on Rothko. I saw it on youtube, if anyone is interested.
I thought it was bullshit until I saw his work in person in DC, and then I knew it was bullshit.
When was that? Schama did the same thing (the Tate), as related in the episode I mention above.
Yes. I like Rothko’s color block paintings. Not all of them, and definitely in person rather than reproduced.
I have no use for opera, though. A lot of my relatives absolutely LOVE opera, and for that reason I wish I also loved it and could share that with them but it washes right over me without leaving an imprint. I think it’s the same with visual art. We can’t all like it all. Even though I am not moved by it I see why others value it.
It’s easier to point at Rothko or deKooning and think it wasn’t hard to make, but I couldn’t make it any more than I could write a great aria.
As far as I’m concerned there’s no reason for ANY single painting to be worth 80 million dollars, but as long as there are gabillionaires who want to say “mine is more expensive than yours” there won’t be an end to that.
I don’t have much of a taste for the modern or minimalist, but I love Rothko’s late works with a glowing passion. They’re visual drugs. They’re very special.
Yeah, my wife had a response like that to the Rothko Chapel in Houston. I’d always found it to be sort of a peaceful, meditative space, but my wife walked in, spent about ten seconds looking at the paintings, muttered “My God, it’s all about death!” and fled. It was the most visceral and emotional reaction I’ve ever seen anyone have to a work of art. Fortunately the Cy Twombly gallery was nearby to cheer her up again.
This. I’ve seen his work many times, in many places. Bullshit.
If you don’t understand the art, the fault is not with the piece. If you have studied what the artist was trying to do and what he was trying to illustrate, then disliking it is a valid response. It doesn’t mean it’s bullshit, it just means it doesn’t appeal to you.
My wife was leading tours on the Portland Rothko exhibit, and we went to a talk given by members of the Rothko family. I learned a lot about the guy and what he was aiming for, but I’m just not a fan of that type of art. Other people nearly swoon over his stuff, but it doesn’t have that kind of effect for me, regardless of what his aim was.
I absolutely love his work. It brings out something emotionally, whether in person (I’ve only seen a handful of his stuff in person) or even on poster print… though its more powerful in person.
Maybe my favorite painter. Well, him and Barnet Newman.