The greatness of this beautiful human being cannot be described , the works no matter what is paid for them are priceless .humanity at its most highest in thought and creation .
I think the controversy stems from the fact that photos of these painting don't do them any justice. The color subtleties far exceed what a camera sees and definitely what a LCD screen can reproduce. I am fortunate to live a few miles from the Rothko Chapel and Menil Collection(free to all!), and I know they are just paintings, but they seriously look like they move, like gaseous clouds, with shadowy forms fading in and out of existence.
I think Rothko liked to look out the window. It's something that a lot of people like to do and as they do it, they find themselves shifting the gaze inward. I think that was Rothko's great insight. He had the notion to put the inward view, onto the window, in his paintings, to give the viewer of the paintings a particular experience that he determined by the color and manner of painting. In some ways the above is a commonplace, done by all artists, but Rothko factored the process down to it's simplest form in a brilliant way. To me that is the essence of his formal contribution to the development of art, and we can enjoy the particular experience of each painting too!
I disliked, almost hated Rothko's work until one day I finally understood it. It takes alot to actually get what he was doing. He reduced everything down into the simplest expression he could make so you were left with the emotions you already carried within you brought to the surface by the experience of being engulfed by these color fields. That's the brilliance. The paintings are about you, the viewer, and the act of feeling. The colors, while pretty, are a bit arbitrary, but their interaction together does bring about a heightened inner awareness for the sensitive viewer. It's okay to not get this, just like some people cannot see the 3D shapes in of those digitally scrambled pictures that were popular in the 90's. The fact that it infuriates people still today in a world where we've seen and accepted so much, is really something. Imagine a body of work that inspires or infuriates with barely any softer indifference in between. That is just another reason the work is great.
You have to be able to look deeper into the artist's motivations to understand an artworks conceptual meaning. If you can't do that, you'll never move beyond representational figurative painting.
Well, tell us art expert; just which art suits you? Or is it that you pretty much hate all modern art? With your comment "most modern so-called artists create any old crap," ...that says it all; and how amazing you have such a vast knowledge of MOST modern artists! Sounds like a full time job…more like your own con job to me. Funny how a man dedicated to a vision in art, works hard to develop it….and someone like YOU comes along with their arrogance and ignorance…and cries CON. You have the same outlook on Modern art as Hitler, BTW.
Such anger over nothing…do you go round being angry all the time? Seems so. As I said, same sentiments as Hitler had. I don't like a lot of art in galleries now, but I don't go off on a crazy rant. MAybe you should have a show called the Red Neck review of Art I can't Afford.
I worked for museums in New York. There they could not comprehend a free museum and the importance of a cultural and intellectual open doors. I am forever grateful to the Saint Louis Art Museum for the my early art education, which came from their open doors to the public. (Also to the nuns that were dedicated to educating us in not only basic school subjects, but also art and music. All for $10 a year.)
Greatest painter of the 20th Century. I think of his last "classic" works as composite portraits of the entire evolution of human emotion. I used to live a few blocks from the Rothko Chapel in Houston, and the more time you spend just being in the presence of these works, the more entity- like they become. The painting are alive. I know people will think this is preposterous, but if you allow them to, they will infiltrate your consciousness. Very strange and wonderful.
Uh, no. This art discredits all artists that actually work hard to make art. This is just color on canvas. Barely acceptable as backgrounds for real painting
@@dogchild44 Well said. Michelangelo, Leonardo Da Vinci, Raphael, Bernini, Caravaggio, Rembrandt and so many more artists were way better than Rothko. Rothko got lucky...he only paints the same old rectangles...even toddlers and kids did that before he was born. Rothko is far too overrated...just like these modern art abstract artists like Tracey Emin, Damien Hirst, Barnett Newman, Cy Twombly.
I am barely 25 minutes into this & I just wanted to pause it to say thanks for sharing this. I am just flooded with emotions & thoughts--the combination of Rothko's works on screen, & someone elucidating with such clarity & careful thought the content of these "contentless" works of art. Christopher Rothko has clearly devoted great time, passion, and effort to develop a whole language, a set of referents & concepts, that help him communicate & explicate his father's work. Very estimable & worthy of respect. I love Rothko's work & am just so thrilled to find this video!
I adore the paintings of Rothko - i experience them as vibratonal feeling states w here body-mind-world are intertwined with a Cosmic Openness that says something unique about the poetics of a limitness now
I know Rothko is divisive, but i find it interesting that the people who don't like him, really really don't like him to the point of that much anger. The comments on this page are amazing
and, just to add - i think he explains what i feel about them really well, contrary to what some said about this lecture - 'you feel very much alone, nothing comes from the paintings' - and just to add anyone that really likes this kind of thing - the natural light Monets at Naoshima island in Japan do a similar thing. We observed the room on an overcast day and it was quite powerful stuff
his son is no public speaker...I saw him speak at his father's exhibition in Vienna...stumbled and fumbled the whole way through...I cannot watch this anymore
+Sonny Corbi Thank you so much for this comment. I also had to finally give up and skip to the question and answer portion. Much, much more interesting and helpful.
Maybe, just maybe none of this was so very deep. Maybe he just liked the way the colors went together or contrasted. Maybe he just liked the way the paint felt sliding across the canvas, or the way he felt in his soul as he created these paintings. People are so interesting. This is such a touching way for this son to connect with his father.
i love almost all of Rothko's work, but have never intellectualized about them. they just make me feel really good, and i never get tired of looking at them. i do wish this guy wasn't reading his speech, he's not a very good reader, though the actual content seems good. he seems to not be hearing himself and it's hard to listen to. i watched 2 documentaries on Rothko and found them interesting and Rothko's insights about art and life insightful. but the tortured artist has become such a cliche - besides most of the torture for them seems to have come from alcoholism. sometimes the stuff an artist says about art can seem so stupid to me, yet was clearly profound to them and others (and vice versa). i almost would rather not know anything about the artist or their thoughts about art, and just feel and be with their work. words can really get in the way, sometimes.
I agree with the "marketing....."woops)".However, a quick YT search and you will find children duplicating these schmucks like Rothko. It's been well touted by world famous art experts that as much as half of the international art market are dupes and the greatest art forges will, obviously, never be known. Look at forgers like, Ken Perenyi. He published a book detailing his life long history as a forger who sold his fakes to Christie’s and Sotheby's, Elmyr DeHory who became so famous that his known forgeries are worth probably as much as the originals and maybe even more! & Han VanMeegeren. and son who also caught a hefty boost in demand and cash for daddy's forgeries.
That’s not why they cry. There is a feeling that comes over you and through you, when you connect with whatever it is that makes us. It’s a reaction to connection to that. Rothko’s paintings remove form and capture essence and that essence allows people to connect with that feeling. The feeling cannot be successfully described by those who haven’t yet felt it. Once you feel it, you know exactly what I am referencing. The feeling comes on most often with music or art and is the root to the importance of art itself. Connecting with that. Paintings like this are a kind of conduit for that experience because it moves us away from form and into essence which allows us to connect to that raw and basic energy.
Rothko, like much Ab Ex work, is meant to evoke an emotional response. Love it, or hate it. It is great work and it's what you make of it, psychologically. Rothko's work makes you EMOTIONAL. They glow. They can be god. They can be nature. It's what you make it!
Mark rothko the father of Abstract contemporary work he is the creator new of colour languages and it's not a joke. Some people are discussting about contemporary art, the value of thoughts they only discuss about assets of painting colours style and the life story of Artist and there affairs there life ancidents it's disgusting it's insult of proper work of art .. Art is not only for eyes it's for brain also. And Mark rohtko was the greatest personality of contemporary world.
The majority of people don't have a cultural perspective on things, this leads to a lack of confidence which translates into intimidation and a form of selfconstipation in front of an art work. Plus, some art works are really demanding, and you would have to put a lot of emotional effort in order to get at terms with. So, there is nothing wrong in exchanging our experiences with art works.
That's like saying, on a basic level, that it's pointless for people to talk about their favourite movies or wonder what a song is about. Works of art, powerful works of art, give birth to a whole world of narratives & supplementary & additional works that makes those initial works of art live forever. This is how the greatest works never die. It's why centuries after Shakespeare wrote his works, he's still one of the most widely read authors in the current day. A thousand thousand actors, directors, writers & artists have tried to explain Hamlet, & yet the work escapes definition. But that doesn't stop us writing about it because it inspires & moves us. And thus Shakespeare will live forever. As will Rothko, who is, for me, one of the greatest artists of the 20th century.
Rothko begat a Dalek who seems to possess none of his fathers understanding of gradients of light, colour and volume on a flat surface. This is a one dimensional monochrome lecture IS a flat surface and is totally colour-less.Turn the sound off and watch the pictures. 😴.
Rothko could it drink a paste of paint and then vomited it in a canvas AND hang it as a Remarkable piece of art, then people would it look at it and share deep thoughts about how inspired was him.... BULL SHIT.
Wow. Talk about talent skipping a generation. So much wind baggery, so many $5 words being tossed to ill effect. So very little illumination. All the hot air balloons that didn't get filled from all this hot air. Such a shame. Wow. Genuinely unimpressive.
Didn't you see your own Rothko in the sunlight? I did and there's no window to inner life, the brush strokes just add to the individuality but it's not about the artist at all, you can't get the point of a color field "classic sectional" if you try to think - you can barely see the canvas when the effect of being enveloped in the color kicks in, all these other bits and pieces you are adding appear to be filler - it's JUST an experiment in color, period end of story - Rubens already was using the same idea but he could actually paint real things, Rothko, after being lauded as a genius for discovering the obvious then appears to have just blobbed random stuff knowing you guys would eat it up as you made up a whole narrative that invented all the other things - some expert, more like a salesman.
I was ridiculed by White art history professors for spending time with Rothko's paintings, because he was dead and White. They wanted to see the portrait of a President while on our trip to the National Gallery.
not all canvas are ART even if Mark Rothko painted them, some of his paintings are masterwork, not all. Art critics and writers only for the money, the TRUTH is other
Art like this discredits all artists that work really hard, dedicating thousands of hours honing their craft. Splotches of color on canvas, just lines of color or big bars of color do not make this good art. Anybody who says it does is obvious looking for way more into this than there is. Look up real artist that practice their craft and work very hard. These look like a child painted them in kindergarten
NO. Art isn't a sport. It is expression. It isn't a race. His paintings are meant to evoke emotion. Not tell a narrative story right off of the bat. It's up to the viewer. Love it. hate it. It does not matter to anyone. It is great work IMHO.
The greatness of this beautiful human being cannot be described , the works no matter what is paid for them are priceless .humanity at its most highest in thought and creation .
Why do you worship another man?
@@jannieschluter9670 Roger has seen the Emperor's New Clothes.
I think the controversy stems from the fact that photos of these painting don't do them any justice. The color subtleties far exceed what a camera sees and definitely what a LCD screen can reproduce. I am fortunate to live a few miles from the Rothko Chapel and Menil Collection(free to all!), and I know they are just paintings, but they seriously look like they move, like gaseous clouds, with shadowy forms fading in and out of existence.
Go huff some farts, pseudointellectual.
Exactly
I think Rothko liked to look out the window. It's something that a lot of people like to do and as they do it, they find themselves shifting the gaze inward. I think that was Rothko's great insight. He had the notion to put the inward view, onto the window, in his paintings, to give the viewer of the paintings a particular experience that he determined by the color and manner of painting.
In some ways the above is a commonplace, done by all artists, but Rothko factored the process down to it's simplest form in a brilliant way. To me that is the essence of his formal contribution to the development of art, and we can enjoy the particular experience of each painting too!
inward windows sealed off form outside to make you focus within
Now that I read your comment you could very easily infer his monolith paintings are literal windows as well.
I disliked, almost hated Rothko's work until one day I finally understood it. It takes alot to actually get what he was doing. He reduced everything down into the simplest expression he could make so you were left with the emotions you already carried within you brought to the surface by the experience of being engulfed by these color fields. That's the brilliance. The paintings are about you, the viewer, and the act of feeling. The colors, while pretty, are a bit arbitrary, but their interaction together does bring about a heightened inner awareness for the sensitive viewer.
It's okay to not get this, just like some people cannot see the 3D shapes in of those digitally scrambled pictures that were popular in the 90's. The fact that it infuriates people still today in a world where we've seen and accepted so much, is really something. Imagine a body of work that inspires or infuriates with barely any softer indifference in between. That is just another reason the work is great.
You have to be able to look deeper into the artist's motivations to understand an artworks conceptual meaning. If you can't do that, you'll never move beyond representational figurative painting.
Well, tell us art expert; just which art suits you?
Or is it that you pretty much hate all modern art? With your comment "most modern so-called artists create any old crap," ...that says it all; and how amazing you have such a vast knowledge of MOST modern artists! Sounds like a full time job…more like your own con job to me.
Funny how a man dedicated to a vision in art, works hard to develop it….and someone like YOU comes along with their arrogance and ignorance…and cries CON. You have the same outlook on Modern art as Hitler, BTW.
Such anger over nothing…do you go round being angry all the time? Seems so. As I said, same sentiments as Hitler had. I don't like a lot of art in galleries now, but I don't go off on a crazy rant. MAybe you should have a show called the Red Neck review of Art I can't Afford.
What does art 'mean'? Can you create an objective definition?
Justin A No. Why even ask?
I worked for museums in New York. There they could not comprehend a free museum and the importance of a cultural and intellectual open doors. I am forever grateful to the Saint Louis Art Museum for the my early art education, which came from their open doors to the public. (Also to the nuns that were dedicated to educating us in not only basic school subjects, but also art and music. All for $10 a year.)
Greatest painter of the 20th Century. I think of his last "classic" works as composite portraits of the entire evolution of human emotion. I used to live a few blocks from the Rothko Chapel in Houston, and the more time you spend just being in the presence of these works, the more entity- like they become. The painting are alive. I know people will think this is preposterous, but if you allow them to, they will infiltrate your consciousness. Very strange and wonderful.
Uh, no. This art discredits all artists that actually work hard to make art. This is just color on canvas. Barely acceptable as backgrounds for real painting
@@dogchild44 Well said. Michelangelo, Leonardo Da Vinci, Raphael, Bernini, Caravaggio, Rembrandt and so many more artists were way better than Rothko. Rothko got lucky...he only paints the same old rectangles...even toddlers and kids did that before he was born. Rothko is far too overrated...just like these modern art abstract artists like Tracey Emin, Damien Hirst, Barnett Newman, Cy Twombly.
@@dogchild44 The people who feel something for his art are just looking at the Emperor's New Clothes in my opinion
I am barely 25 minutes into this & I just wanted to pause it to say thanks for sharing this. I am just flooded with emotions & thoughts--the combination of Rothko's works on screen, & someone elucidating with such clarity & careful thought the content of these "contentless" works of art. Christopher Rothko has clearly devoted great time, passion, and effort to develop a whole language, a set of referents & concepts, that help him communicate & explicate his father's work. Very estimable & worthy of respect. I love Rothko's work & am just so thrilled to find this video!
I adore the paintings of Rothko - i experience them as vibratonal feeling states w here body-mind-world are intertwined with a Cosmic Openness that says something unique about the poetics of a limitness now
Emperor's New Clothes, madam.
I know Rothko is divisive, but i find it interesting that the people who don't like him, really really don't like him to the point of that much anger. The comments on this page are amazing
and, just to add - i think he explains what i feel about them really well, contrary to what some said about this lecture - 'you feel very much alone, nothing comes from the paintings' - and just to add anyone that really likes this kind of thing - the natural light Monets at Naoshima island in Japan do a similar thing. We observed the room on an overcast day and it was quite powerful stuff
his son is no public speaker...I saw him speak at his father's exhibition in Vienna...stumbled and fumbled the whole way through...I cannot watch this anymore
Thank you 🙏
Some of those paintings were hanging upside down.
during the question and answer period Rothko's son produced a much better understanding of his father and his work -
+Sonny Corbi Thank you so much for this comment. I also had to finally give up and skip to the question and answer portion. Much, much more interesting and helpful.
+Martha Morris thank you
I think everyone should experience a Rothko before commenting on one.
@scratch How?
15:57 (Untitled: Red, Black, White on Yellow - 1955) That's the one that hangs framed just 12 inches from me right now, and every day.
Some can only see black or red, while I am drawn even into a (quality) paper print Rothko. I would love to visit the Tate exhibition
Maybe, just maybe none of this was so very deep. Maybe he just liked the way the colors went together or contrasted. Maybe he just liked the way the paint felt sliding across the canvas, or the way he felt in his soul as he created these paintings. People are so interesting. This is such a touching way for this son to connect with his father.
+Martha Morris hahah this boxes are genius omg who else can paint 2 difrent collored boxes lol
@@ziLeT11 Lmao I agree with you Stanko
he wrote about his processes
I recommend his post cards they require a bit of postal work first but then all your friends own a Rothko
This is not a lecture.
Why didn't he just pass out copies of the text he stood and read in a mind deadening drone ?
who cares, at least he went up there and did it!
Groovy
i love almost all of Rothko's work, but have never intellectualized about them. they just make me feel really good, and i never get tired of looking at them. i do wish this guy wasn't reading his speech, he's not a very good reader, though the actual content seems good. he seems to not be hearing himself and it's hard to listen to. i watched 2 documentaries on Rothko and found them interesting and Rothko's insights about art and life insightful. but the tortured artist has become such a cliche - besides most of the torture for them seems to have come from alcoholism. sometimes the stuff an artist says about art can seem so stupid to me, yet was clearly profound to them and others (and vice versa). i almost would rather not know anything about the artist or their thoughts about art, and just feel and be with their work. words can really get in the way, sometimes.
I wonder if the speaker wrote or created any of this lecture - he stumbles constantly as he reads - and this brings me to, I wonder if he understands Rothko's work - ? - (the primal essence) -
If we go back to Pollack - Rothko - Klein - etc. they were the first in a newly recognized movement - thus no one can duplicate a Rothko or any of the visual, modern, Artist of the initial movement -
If all of these collective works were not continually marketed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --(woops)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I agree with the "marketing....."woops)".However, a quick YT search and you will find children duplicating these schmucks like Rothko. It's been well touted by world famous art experts that as much as half of the international art market are dupes and the greatest art forges will, obviously, never be known. Look at forgers like, Ken Perenyi. He published a book detailing his life long history as a forger who sold his fakes to Christie’s and Sotheby's, Elmyr DeHory who became so famous that his known forgeries are worth probably as much as the originals and maybe even more! & Han VanMeegeren. and son who also caught a hefty boost in demand and cash for daddy's forgeries.
hes rothkos son
That’s not why they cry. There is a feeling that comes over you and through you, when you connect with whatever it is that makes us. It’s a reaction to connection to that. Rothko’s paintings remove form and capture essence and that essence allows people to connect with that feeling. The feeling cannot be successfully described by those who haven’t yet felt it. Once you feel it, you know exactly what I am referencing. The feeling comes on most often with music or art and is the root to the importance of art itself. Connecting with that. Paintings like this are a kind of conduit for that experience because it moves us away from form and into essence which allows us to connect to that raw and basic energy.
Rothko, like much Ab Ex work, is meant to evoke an emotional response. Love it, or hate it. It is great work and it's what you make of it, psychologically. Rothko's work makes you EMOTIONAL. They glow. They can be god. They can be nature. It's what you make it!
The one word that comes to me when I observe a Rothko -- Expensive.
I ve never seen proper Rothko explanation to the picture by anybody there…, sad.
One million red likes
Mark rothko the father of Abstract contemporary work he is the creator new of colour languages and it's not a joke. Some people are discussting about contemporary art, the value of thoughts they only discuss about assets of painting colours style and the life story of Artist and there affairs there life ancidents it's disgusting it's insult of proper work of art .. Art is not only for eyes it's for brain also.
And Mark rohtko was the greatest personality of contemporary world.
Starts at 3:35.
super art 111
If you need to explain the image, it doesn't communicate very well.
Sometimes (oftentimes, even) the very purpose of an image is to provoke its own explanation, for the reason that its explanation is not immediate.
The majority of people don't have a cultural perspective on things, this leads to a lack of confidence which translates into intimidation and a form of selfconstipation in front of an art work. Plus, some art works are really demanding, and you would have to put a lot of emotional effort in order to get at terms with. So, there is nothing wrong in exchanging our experiences with art works.
That's like saying, on a basic level, that it's pointless for people to talk about their favourite movies or wonder what a song is about. Works of art, powerful works of art, give birth to a whole world of narratives & supplementary & additional works that makes those initial works of art live forever. This is how the greatest works never die. It's why centuries after Shakespeare wrote his works, he's still one of the most widely read authors in the current day. A thousand thousand actors, directors, writers & artists have tried to explain Hamlet, & yet the work escapes definition. But that doesn't stop us writing about it because it inspires & moves us. And thus Shakespeare will live forever. As will Rothko, who is, for me, one of the greatest artists of the 20th century.
+Chase F that's really no explanation.
crazy nuts
Those are some weird Rothko's, I like.
Rothko begat a Dalek who seems to possess none of his fathers understanding of gradients of light, colour and volume on a flat surface. This is a one dimensional monochrome lecture IS a flat surface and is totally colour-less.Turn the sound off and watch the pictures. 😴.
Rothko could it drink a paste of paint and then vomited it in a canvas AND hang it as a Remarkable piece of art, then people would it look at it and share deep thoughts about how inspired was him.... BULL SHIT.
Lmao!!!
his son delivers great content, but he does not deliver it well!
💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙😊👍
Wow. Talk about talent skipping a generation. So much wind baggery, so many $5 words being tossed to ill effect. So very little illumination. All the hot air balloons that didn't get filled from all this hot air. Such a shame. Wow. Genuinely unimpressive.
These who DO NOT understand or appreciate art should NOT be posting their idiotic comments in here. Go watch comics or The Simpsons but GO.
You sound mad Daniel, take a chill pill. It's you who should be watching The Simpsons.
Didn't you see your own Rothko in the sunlight? I did and there's no window to inner life, the brush strokes just add to the individuality but it's not about the artist at all, you can't get the point of a color field "classic sectional" if you try to think - you can barely see the canvas when the effect of being enveloped in the color kicks in, all these other bits and pieces you are adding appear to be filler - it's JUST an experiment in color, period end of story - Rubens already was using the same idea but he could actually paint real things, Rothko, after being lauded as a genius for discovering the obvious then appears to have just blobbed random stuff knowing you guys would eat it up as you made up a whole narrative that invented all the other things - some expert, more like a salesman.
I was ridiculed by White art history professors for spending time with Rothko's paintings, because he was dead and White. They wanted to see the portrait of a President while on our trip to the National Gallery.
not all canvas are ART even if Mark Rothko painted them, some of his paintings are masterwork, not all. Art critics and writers only for the money, the TRUTH is other
Masterwork??? Rothko did masterworks??? even kids and toddlers could do what he and Barnett Newman did...Onement is so overrated.
here is a film hommage to rothko: ruclips.net/video/qqeNm078SOM/видео.html
Emperor's Clothes !! yes tell me I don't understand modern art LMAO
I agree lmao
here is a short film homage to mark rothko: ruclips.net/video/qqeNm078SOM/видео.html
try to describe an "Abstract Expressionist" painting to a blind person,,,,,,,,see how far you get !
'Void of content' then. Crap.
Very boring 😩
Fart, did he literally say fart, in a learned society. To talk about ones farts. Dumb
embarrassingly bad public speaker
Splish! Splash,! Splosh!,,,,,,,,,I'm an Abstract Expressionist,,,,,,can't you tell ? It's obvious, just ask an expert!
Well said lol
Art like this discredits all artists that work really hard, dedicating thousands of hours honing their craft. Splotches of color on canvas, just lines of color or big bars of color do not make this good art. Anybody who says it does is obvious looking for way more into this than there is. Look up real artist that practice their craft and work very hard. These look like a child painted them in kindergarten
U.mean
Like basquiat#&;:$@€£\%=$
I agree Sloan Manning.
NO. Art isn't a sport. It is expression. It isn't a race. His paintings are meant to evoke emotion. Not tell a narrative story right off of the bat. It's up to the viewer. Love it. hate it. It does not matter to anyone. It is great work IMHO.
Basically Satanist paintings 🖼 .