Mark Rothko - Vibrations
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 сен 2015
- MOCA Director Philippe Vergne, USC’s Suzanne Hudson, and artist Mary Weatherford discuss the work of Mark Rothko. Rothko’s paintings strive to express complex human emotions through vast color fields vibrating against one another. The works are physically bound by the edges of the canvas, but their impact lays in the experience of viewing.
Director: Alexa Karolinski
Cinematography: Ryan Carmody, Caleb Heller
Editor: Grace Kline
Music: Ben Sterling
Color Grade: Nick Sander, The Mill
Sound Mix: Owen Granich-Young
I knew it wasn’t just me there is something so special about his work that can’t be replicated with more literal paintings. He’d quite inspiring.
I'm not in the least; sensitive, emotional, sentimental, touchy - feely, wear my heart on my sleeve kind of guy at all. But somehow Rothko's work stirs me, ..even to point of actually enjoying the feeling it gives me. Truly amazing, each and every piece. Very well done video. Thank you.
one does not look up at a beautiful clear blue sky and criticize the sky for a lack of an image or another color - not at all - instead we look up at the vast blueness and feel elevated and inspired simply by the vastness of the single color of beautiful blue - an transfer of energy at a very deep level has taken place - so Rothko creates a space where we can experience the energy and essence of color on its own terms - in its relationship with us and with various other colors - this is part of becoming a more aware and sentient human being - so it is also opening up the viewer to reclaim more of their own inner power of perception and feeling
Zen.
you tell em dude
lol...
Thank you for this. I'm so using this argument.
beautifully said
Geeft mij toch steeds troost. 🖼️
The blankness is the purity, the simplicity is the content. I have sat among these paintings and cried; they connect to my soul. I felt this before i knew anything about the painter, just visited the black and maroon paintings in the old Tate gallery thirty five years ago and was profoundly moved.
Rothko has quickly become one of my favorite artist if not my favorite, the first time seeing his paintings online really struck me and spoke to me. I hope I get to see many of his paintings in real life would be a great thing
Similar for me. When I went to the `Tate, I would arrive before it opened and headed straight to the Seagram Murals so I could have some minutes alone with them. Fortunately I have long legs so get there quickly. When others arrived, I would leave and look round the rest of the galleries. But always Rothko first.
Similar experience for me. And no one seems to understand until they experience it. My husband was on a trip in Houston and decided to visit the Rothko Chapel. No he understands...
Do you know if the Rothko painting is still at the Tate at St Pauls.
If I drew something in 5 minutes and a bunch of certified art experts kept convincing you it was a gorgeous transcendental and a unique experience for each person who truly gazed into and within it, I guarantee you would soon be crying and amazed at its mere presence in front of you as well. Why do you think people get panic attacks going to the supermarket while you do it and think it's nothing special? It's a little something called overthinking. If something requires you to go on convincing yourself that it's beautiful and give yourself a confirmation bias, that doesn't validify the object itself, it just speaks to the extent the human mind can go to trick itself and produce feelings within itself. People get great revelations looking at the back of their eyelids when meditating. Don't attribute your reaction to the painting to the painting itself, but it speaks to the effect it can have on the mind if you walk into an expensive posh art gallery where everyone looks respectable, and you see a canvas hung on the blank white wall as if there is nothing more important. I guarantee you if an amateur on the street was trying to make a little money and selling this painting for $60 you wouldn't look twice and walk off. Because the difference is really your mentality and approach when viewing it, not the painting itself. The value comes from all the hype of the painting and the mind's effect that I've described above, not the painting itself. But I understand that if you're so deep in that world and mindset you won't know how to see an objective truth.
There is no way to fully explain the beauty of Rothko's paintings...but one simply has to experience it. Sitting with and staring at a Rothko is when the beauty is revealed
Haunting and sublime paintings. That sneak up on the viewer. The more you look and there is much more going on. You can become enchanted by the images.
"They want you to be there with them" Spot on, I love his "still paintings".
I saw my first Rothko at ngv Melbourne the other day, I understand what people talk about.
The Action is Where the Colors Meet
Absolutely mesmerizing, Thanks for sharing!
When people who don't know about composition, color theory, scale and etc comment shity things about rothko's paintings but they have no idea how hard it is to execute a good abstract painting and how much pure talent it demands.
Preach.
Maybe you two are looking into it too much?
@@aspiknf: Maybe you're not looking into it enough.
Plus, it helps not to be excessively left-brained. Or…you know…shallow.
If I drew something in 5 minutes and a bunch of certified art experts kept convincing you it was a gorgeous transcendental and a unique experience for each person who truly gazed into and within it, I guarantee you would soon be crying and amazed at its mere presence in front of you as well. Why do you think people get panic attacks going to the supermarket while you do it and think it's nothing special? It's a little something called overthinking. If something requires you to go on convincing yourself that it's beautiful and give yourself a confirmation bias, that doesn't validify the object itself, it just speaks to the extent the human mind can go to trick itself and produce feelings within itself. People get great revelations looking at the back of their eyelids when meditating. Don't attribute your reaction to the painting to the painting itself, but it speaks to the effect it can have on the mind if you walk into an expensive posh art gallery where everyone looks respectable, and you see a canvas hung on the blank white wall as if there is nothing more important. I guarantee you if an amateur on the street was trying to make a little money and selling this painting for $60 you wouldn't look twice and walk off. Because the difference is really your mentality and approach when viewing it, not the painting itself. The value comes from all the hype of the painting and the mind's effect that I've described above, not the painting itself. But I understand that if you're so deep in that world and mindset you won't know how to see an objective truth.
I cried the first time I saw a Rothko at the Guggenheim
The subtleties and vibrations of the colours affect you to your core
Yes, yes, yes!
If I drew something in 5 minutes and a bunch of certified art experts kept convincing you it was a gorgeous transcendental and a unique experience for each person who truly gazed into and within it, I guarantee you would soon be crying and amazed at its mere presence in front of you as well. Why do you think people get panic attacks going to the supermarket while you do it and think it's nothing special? It's a little something called overthinking. If something requires you to go on convincing yourself that it's beautiful and give yourself a confirmation bias, that doesn't validify the object itself, it just speaks to the extent the human mind can go to trick itself and produce feelings within itself. People get great revelations looking at the back of their eyelids when meditating. Don't attribute your reaction to the painting to the painting itself, but it speaks to the effect it can have on the mind if you walk into an expensive posh art gallery where everyone looks respectable, and you see a canvas hung on the blank white wall as if there is nothing more important. I guarantee you if an amateur on the street was trying to make a little money and selling this painting for $60 you wouldn't look twice and walk off. Because the difference is really your mentality and approach when viewing it, not the painting itself. The value comes from all the hype of the painting and the mind's effect that I've described above, not the painting itself. But I understand that if you're so deep in that world and mindset you won't know how to see an objective truth.
It's like they are moving! Vibrant! Alive!
✨✳️💫✳️💫✳️💫✳️💫✳️💫✳️✨
A pleasure to watch
Actually every one can think what ever he wants when look at these art works.
Yep that's the whole point. Finally people start to understand this kind of stuff. No offense.
@@interrexclamacion
*ART LIKE PICASSO AND DEVINCI....*
This is very informative, insightful, and inspirational! Great video! 😊👍
Están muy bellas las obras , las formas y los colores de Mark Rothko !
Sublime....
⤴⤴⤴⤴⤴
well done. Short but sweet
Beautiful Rothko w Blue
Amazing!
beautiful paintings
"holding one hostage" is a good stab at it...emotions betray and cause pain or pleasure....its not neutral
I don't think I will ever understand Rothko or why his paintings merit worldwide recognition.
Have you been in a room with one?
HonestSonics Yes, a few times. I felt nothing.
***** It's OK not to like it or be affected by it. I think people who aren't can be inclined to disparage the work as a defence mechanism against feeling like they're 'missing out' or not getting it somehow. There's only something to 'get' if it affects you, if it doesn't, there isn't. If you believe the emperor truly has no clothes and we are all deluding ourselves, then fine.
I find that they radiate a very powerful, meditative aura. The large pieces especially. It's almost like being in the presence of a wise, indifferent deity. Silently communicating something profound, the interpretation of which being entirely down to the observer. The longer you spend with it, the more intoxicated you become. It's quite an experience.
The fact that they go for ridiculous sums of money is neither here nor there. You can see them in a gallery for free.
HonestSonics, that's a great description of the impact of standing in front of a Rothko painting. His work reminds me of a great line in t.s. eliot's 'the wasteland': "Then spoke the thunder DA". That immense, familiar, unknowable communication.
Yvves Klein is a artist who inspired artist Piero Manzoni to sell cans of his own poop as art. After seeing an exhibit of Klein’s multiple canvases of only blue paint he was convinced that an artist could sell anything as long as the artist was seen as popular with the wealthy. So he pooped in multiple tin cans and called the “art pieces” “Artist’s Shit” and sold them. A can of his poop sold to Sotheby’s for $30k and that was considered a discount as his other cans of poo sold for much more. This is not a joke it’s 100% true. Hope this changes people’s feelings about artists like Klein, pollock, and Rothko as they are all frauds who churned our paintings like a printing press.
yeah, I'm with Philippe.
It's a shame seeing a Rothko painting digitally doesn't do it justice at all.
Pixelkh I have seen a few in person. Made me feel exactly the same as watching this video through my computer screen. Its expensive garbage, simply a canvas painted with some layers.To actually spew that paintings like these make you feel anything really makes people sound like pretentious pricks.
@@augustortiz nobody will remember you
squarz you sound like a pretentious prick
@@squarz I remember Augusto, he's better than Rothko. I bought Augusto's paintings because he paints more than a few silly squares like Rothko does.
@@squarz I do remember Augusto, he's comment is make my mood elevated and I need to laugh because he's kinda right about this overrated painting scam.
🔝
It's like Zen, the Tao, or the Sacred OHM. . . . . not really but just like those..... I don't still understand modern art, but I kind of starting to appreciate it right now little by little on my own. . . .
it's like the color fields are like the colors of the sky and the sea without anything on it..one is lighter than the other...one reflects the other.....and they're just there present as we feel the colors reminding us of something. It's just presence and the state of emotion or feeling it gives. Colors can give you an idea or a sensation of a stat of being, a feeling, an emotion, or reminding you of a certain situation. In these paintings of Rothko, it shows that colors are sometimes enough than how we try to mimic and represent the real world in 2D space.............or maybe that he just hates realism in art and really tried to just use colors alone to state an idea against realism.
Um dos poucos pintores abstratos que gosto
Let us make more Rothko's
rothko is one of the few 20th century artists whose hype lives up to the works. compare a pollock to a rothko. to me rothko is superior and contains a quiet humility. i can't wait to sit with one in real life.
Theres a red rothko in my area. I think if i saw more than one in a room i might shit myself
Reading some of the comments is just, lol 😂😂😂
gapjin art,,,,,,
much talk about how to look at an mr painting - about how the painting demands to be looked at - 'demands' because its confrontational symmetry and intense focus on color and transition zones 'demands' a reciprocal focus/absorption...but...and this is common in criticism...you end up w/a set of directions for looking, but no 'slowed down' excursion through the experience of a particular painting...no close reading...color is talked about a lot...but is even one particular hue, value, intensity, transitional zone, or composition mentioned?
I can sit here and say that my 6 year old niece could paint a Rothko, and I think that's how everyone feels, but I've heard that actually being in front of a Rothko painting is a really amazing experience, would love to see one
It truly is you should really see when they are gorgeous something a camera cannot picture it's even more powerful given the context of his life he was a very troubled person and with those paintings found a way to easily convey that to people without lumber and over it and thinking more to depression and sadness and anxiety.
to enjoy his work you have to emotionally invested otherwise its just color and your return to nothingness, hope that idea makes it more accessible.
🤔 i can do red square in black
The vibration of colors illicit a response from artist asviewer
A very moving experience 😃 occurs that is trancendental in spirituality that you have found a place to become the Rothko artist and feel what he felt during his expression no longer repressed
A. sounds can be produced at any interval of frequencies, even arbitrarily small, and on a huge range - there are also infinite notes, just not on a standard piano; and B. the human eye can only distinguish between color hues down to a certain level, so although infinite colors can exist, you can't actually use all of them (which also applies to sound, but my point here is to draw that parallel). I'm not sure why she felt the need to get defensive about piano concertos in an interview about color field painting, but sure. Piano concertos are something people realize have a variety of strict rules, and probably more so than abstract painting - because they do. Similarly, classical painting techniques had a wider and stricter variety of rules than avant-garde music, but I don't see John Cage interviews where people mock Leonardo for limiting himself within the rules of color theory and perspective.
Otherwise this is a great video, but that comment really struck at me as someone who enjoys piano concertos and minimalist musical techniques as much as classical portraits and minimalist painting techniques. There's just no reason to draw that arbitrary divide among levels of creative expression.
Why has art turned to philosophy to feel like it's fulfilling a purpose? It's a recurring theme I'm seeing more and more with modern composers, they all have their own philosophy and they are all praising the thought behind their works and not the content anymore. Shouldn't it be both? I'm not criticizing Rothko- I can't really say that I'm in a position to do so as I haven't seen a Rothko painting irl- but I'm just curious at how big this turn towards the philosophy behind a word is during the modern and post-modern era.
For instance, how can one criticize John Cage's "4'33"" in terms of the music itself? Well the question doesn't really seem to apply to the piece since there is no music composed, so we have to then look at the philosophy behind it. But how does that make it a piece of music? I'm probably not choosing a very good example as that is a musical experiment more so than an actual piece of music, but people nowadays think of experiments in art to be as significant in value as the great masterworks, something which does not really work out, as they're experiments. We shouldn't worship experimentation in art the way we do; rather we should examine it with a critical mind, take from it what is helpful for the development of our art, and move on.
Foivos Kyriakoudis damn man, you got a discord?
To understand Rothko or his contemporaries and progenitors one must be aware of their evolution as artists and their time. I believe I am correct when I say, detractors of artists have never themselves put paint to canvas in any serious way.
That's why they can remain objective imo
I could paint that too dawg
You didn't though
I usually have an eye for nuance and subtlety in paintings, yet, I just don't see those elements, in good measure, in Rothko's work. Torn, blurred edges of geometric shapes, alone, is not enough for me. Perhaps it's my problem...
I'm happy to believe that Rothko is a great artist, but I feel sorry that he didn't get further than painting he's backgrounds only 😂 😆 😂
Blaaaa blahhhhh blaaaaa
Mary Weatherford needs to listen to some different types of music that like Rothko go beyond form and structure and get to the essence of vibration, dissonance, consonance, microtones, volume and destroy the walls of meter, rhythm and melody.
louderthangod this poem is not gona save you dear. This is a scam.
Atang Motloli someone’s a Joe Rogan fan, how’s it feel to think your smart because you do dmt and like free speech, but when anyone try’s to challenge you on what you view you have bitch fit and think acting pompous did because god forbid they like/understand something you don’t.
I like abstract or symbolic painting but i dont know because Rothko as been famous?. Has he a good Manager and blind critics?
Yvves Klein is a artist who inspired artist Piero Manzoni to sell cans of his own poop as art. After seeing an exhibit of Klein’s multiple canvases of only blue paint he was convinced that an artist could sell anything as long as the artist was seen as popular with the wealthy. So he pooped in multiple tin cans and called the “art pieces” “Artist’s Shit” and sold them. A can of his poop sold to Sotheby’s for $30k and that was considered a discount as his other cans of poo sold for much more. This is not a joke it’s 100% true. Hope this changes people’s feelings about artists like Klein, pollock, and Rothko as they are all frauds who churned our paintings like a printing press.
Next time I'm painting a room, I'll make sure not to cover over the paint underneath and I'll let the brush run out of paint near the edges of the two colours, then maybe my house will be worth millions of dollars. Oh wait, no it won't because my name isn't Mark Rothko. But if it WERE, oh boy! Listening to these people talk is hilarious.
Well I do admit is that name is a lot in the world you should really stand in front of a Rothko. It's a powerful experience you don't judge the vastness of the sky and say it needs reform you look up at the vastness and the beautiful inside the blue I'm still in somebody else's allegory but who cares it's very good.
I HAVE A LOVE , HATE RELATIONSHIP WITH ART LIKE THIS. YES THE WORK HAS A BEAUTIFUL LOOK TO IT. BUT IT'S ALSO COLORED SHAPES ON A CANVAS. THESE PEOPLE READ WAY TO FAR INTO IT.
I guess, more than anything, Rothko was a cunning, shrewd man. Of course he knew that his paintings were total garbage. However it's the nature of man that try to put meaning into evertyhing that he sees, even it has absolutely no meaning. He was just a man as sly as a fox, whom became aware of that truth pretty early in his life.
liars
My painting better then this 😐 i don’t lie
It's not, but I sure hope it's better than your spelling.
No such thing as a better painting
rubbish
No
@@interrexclamacion yes it is rubbish
Good lord, you know the world is going to shit when uninspired rubbish like that passes for "art".
If you can't see with your eyes open please close them :)
ok that Shows, that u dont know anything about art^^
Hmmm....I kinda think it sucks...I mean quite bad. Now I myself illustrate, but come from a family of painters....good painters. This is the art world kinda making suckers out of folks while making a big buck.
That's shit wack
Money laundering