I haven’t had much exposure to his work, but I have been to the Rothko Chapel here in Houston a few times. It is a powerful place. I don’t think the paintings on their own would mean much to me, but the instillation is powerful, for lack of better word. And I agree it feels like death.
Rotho’s paintings are marvelous. Very much like.
If you are in DC the Philips Collection is a very nice museum, luckily they have lots of non Rothko stuff there. It’s near Dupont Circle.
I think pulykamell might have an opinion… we’ve had quite a few threads on this.
Many of these comments seem familiar. I love his work.
Rothko is hit or miss for me. A few of his are fun to stare at and wonder what they are about. I’m not at all a fan of the school of art that says you have to research the artist and figure out what he or she was going through and whatnot to appreciate their art.
The only thing that makes art art is if you are the first person to do it, really. No one else had been doing what Rothko did, as painfully simple as it seems to be to do (not sure if it is actually simple). And that’s why it’s art and worth millions.
I also disagree that there is any difference between seeing a Rothko in person and then seeing it as a poster or online. Exactly the same. The size of the canvas and texture of the paint has absolutely no bearing on how much I can appreciate the pieces.
I honestly couldn’t tell you if I wanted to; I have no ability to accurately place past events. All I could say is it was probably over ten years ago based on the gf that I was there with.
I shall watch that Schama episode with interest though.
Love him. First time I saw one in person I was transfixed for a good 15 minutes.
I find them mesmerizing. Gorgeous art. Not surprised to see the usual bullshit remarks by people who do not like it though.
Yep same here. I like many of them in person, but understand that his work is a lightning rod for many.
About 10-15 years ago, the Art Institute of Chicago had a display that went through the artistic evolution of Rothko. I went in with a closed (bullshit!) mind and left really understanding what he was going for. I’m still not a fan of abstract art, but after seeing the collection, I can totally appreciate what he was going for and see his immense talent.
We have a Rothko poster print in our living room.
So what is he going for? Did he hate geometry class or something?
When you look at a large painting of his, the fuzzy borders of the squares can play with your peripheral vision and kinda float - if you tap into that sensation, you get that “doorway to the edge of the universe” feeling. I think he was exploiting how we see/perceive and using it to trigger that feeling in, well, some people…
Maybe it helps if you are drunk or high
Yeah, but everything’s better if you’re drunk or high.
Sounds like we should get off your lawn 
You started the thread saying you don’t get Rothko, don’t like his work and can’t understand why it sells for so much. Others said they understand the hate, but there’s a lot of respect for what he achieved. You asked what you’re supposed to see, and it is articulated, and you dismiss it with “guess you gotta be high”.
Okay, you don’t like Rothko. We get it. Others do, a lot - apparently $80mm worth for someone with the bucks - and can articulate why they do. Any others points to be made here?
Add me to the list of people who have been converted by seeing his work in person. I can’t explain it either, but I was truly moved. Damned if I will ever find the words to convince anyone else. It’s worth seeing for yourself and then you can judge.
I don’t think the Beatles would be so popular if they recorded and released Hey Jude 30 different times, with a few small changes to the words for each version. 
This just in: painting and music are two different mediums.