My inquiry was brought on by this: Prosecutor: Art dealer Bergantiños Diaz was 'master of forgery' - CNN.com My question? Who in their right mind would pay $8 million for that? I understand that art is almost wholly subjective, yet there is almost always one small objective criteria that defines great art - it MOVES people who are exposed to it. Who in the Hell is in any way "moved" by any of his works? Google images: https://www.google.com/search?q=mark+rothko&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=P99XU7OcOuiMyAGKzIGICA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1024&bih=679 Sorry, I despise Warhol for his mass production, but I can appreciate some of his works, because I could see he had both talent and vision. Picasso whored himself out, doodling little crap sketches to cash in on his name, but surely did some AMAZING things. Dali? See my description of Picasso above. Huge fan of both their masterworks. Rothko? Call me either blind, or completely unappreciative. A "name" shouldn't mean value - at least to the tune of millions.
Rothko is considered a pioneer of the American Abstract Expressionist school, a movement which placed New York in the vanguard of modern art, in the late forties and early fifties. New York took over from Paris, which is where Picasso and Dali, to name the same artists you mention, found fame and fortune before WWII. As for prices, some living artists -Jeff Koons, for example- can command prices which Old Master painters never seem to reach, unless they are the five or six top names.
If you haven't stood in front of a Rothko there is little point of trying to convince you of anything. If you judge art on mere online photographic reproductions you are completely missing the point of these paintings. The subtlety is often lost, as is colour, along with scale and depth. You can't truly appreciate art via the internet. You have to share the same space as these works.
David, you are not missing anything. Though with that attitude, you won't be invited to the best parties. LOL . See this and the youtube on the first comment. Art Shams and Political Scams - Taki's Magazine We have the Rothko chapel here in h-town. Like my sister says, "Meh.."
Very well put. The surface of these works is an invitation into their depths, and it is true this can only be experienced in person. Rothko's essays on abstract art (in general and his own painting) are extraordinarily incisive and beautifully written – well worth reading. It is also interesting to note there was a strong and conscious spiritual dimension to his work, and he had a keen awareness of art history as well. I understand the disbelief engendered by the crazy prices. I would encourage skeptics to try the simple thought experiment of separating Rothko's works from their 'market value' and consider your response after spending some time, quietly and alone, in contemplation of them. After all, if you read this forum you already understand there's a world of difference between the satisfaction of guiding your Ferrari along a scenic, winding road on a beautiful day and the mindset of speculator/collectors driving up the prices of rare Ferraris in hopes of a return on their investment...
Contemporary art can be worth a lot of money, a Rothko sold for nearly $87 million in 2012. I am currently trying to authenticate (for a customer) a Pollock painting from circa 1949. If I can get this picture authenticated it will be worth near on $10 - $15 mil. If not it is worth probably under $100. The art market is rife with fakes and some of these pieces are in museums!
Ferrari 250 GTO - what's the deal? See what kind of response that will stir up. Some arguments will never satisfy detractors. All I can say is that you can look at a Rothko as just a piece of decoration, but that would be just as simple as viewing a 250 GTO as just a car. It takes curiosity, humility, and time to learn to appreciate these things. And some may not deem it worth it. Which is fine. Fortunately in the case of the truly great artists in History, their place is set no matter what. That goes for Rothko, as much as it does for Warhol. Forget about the money. Look deeper. If you have the curiosity, the patience to learn, I promise you there's a lot of pleasure into looking at really great art. But I respect gut feeling too. If it doesn't move you, it just doesn't move you. I just don't believe these initial reactions have to be permanent. Here's something I recommend: http://www.amazon.com/But-Is-It-Art-Introduction/dp/0192853678
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder....so is art. The last few paintings I bought were by an Italian artist named Lucio Sollazzi. Friends thought I was crazy...but I love his work.
I absolutely am... Another question... who would pay $$$ for a "Thomas Kinkade" "Original" painted entirely by a computer??? Perhaps some would be happier at a Starving Artists event at the Holiday Inn.
Kinkade made himself into a wealthy guy, but IMHO....his stuff belongs in bathrooms at the low end Holiday Inns.......Cheesy is a word that comes to mind.....
Yup....he made a fortune mass producing his stuff....seems that wasn't enough for him as he went off the deep end....
Timely thread That guy could talk for hours about nothing, haha. I have been into art since being a young kid and attending art school. Had a great job during college as a guard at one of the countries nicest art museums, worked days and then nights. Kinda like ben stillers Night at the Museum. The best art is something that mixes great skill with a unique take. Rothko seems to have a modest amount of both, however his works are pleasant to look at. I was just at a local museum this week to see a traveling show that had some O'keefe's and a Rockwell. Norman Rockwell had amazing talent, incredible ability. O'keefe had talent and a unique take. I was telling my brother the other day she could do what Photoshop does now for everyone, blend from 1 color to another seemlessly. The Rockwell - https://www.flickr.com/photos/86552444@N05/14034552924/ couple O'keefe's - https://www.flickr.com/photos/86552444@N05/14034569764/in/photostream/ my 2 favorite artists from an LA gallery -- https://www.flickr.com/photos/86552444@N05/9353287834/ While at the museum mentioned above I wrote down the names of some artists whose works I liked, I didn't know them by name, did a google on one and surprized to learn who it was, this guy had massive talent and a very unique take, timeless art -- name= Grant Wood https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=651&q=andy+warhol+paintings&oq=andy+warhol+paintings&gs_l=img.3..0l10.1259.8959.0.9431.26.17.0.8.8.0.612.2791.5j1j4j1j1j1.13.0....0...1ac.1.32.img..9.17.1474.eZzduZ7EGow#hl=en&q=grant%20wood%20famous%20paintings&revid=2056419403&tbm=isch&facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=cjvA52yU2o0FxM%253A%3BA8dGR2r0_JPS5M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fkaplanpicturemaker.com%252Fyahoo_site_admin%252Fassets%252Fimages%252Fwood.343154756_std.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fkaplanpicturemaker.com%252Fccc_painting_i%252Fartists_p-z%3B600%3B374 beautiful- http://kaplanpicturemaker.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/wood.343154756_std.jpg
Grant Wood?... he's very well known... surprised you did not recognize him... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Gothic
Of course I had seen AG but I didn't study art history, just art, and I am lousy with names. But it proves my eye for good stuff is still working just fine and that guy is talented, Here is another one of his, great stuff -- http://artista75.altervista.org/l6.jpg
Not sure why it is silly? I've spent countless hours gazing at works at the Art Institute in Chicago. Some of Rothko's works have been displayed there, and at least one IS currently on display. Have spent a few hours taking in the Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago. I spent as many hours in the day I had available soaking in the wonders of El Museo del Prado, and nearly an hour taking in Picasso's Guernica back when it was displayed at Cason Del Buen Retiro. And, I've toured tons of lesser art museums/collections, and openings. I have a strong appreciation for many forms of art. Yes, it is a "personal" thing, and personal opinion was/is that I am not "wowed" by Rothko's works. As JCR (and his sister) says: "Meh." I asked, "What's the deal?" I didn't see a single post/reply along the lines of, "THIS aspect of Rothko's work moves me: (fill in this blank)" Comparisons to a 250 GTO? That simply doesn't make sense. The GTO may, or may not appeal to someone, but by no means could be described as a terribly simplistic automobile that it would seem any grade school student could create (when put next to almost any other existing example of an automobile.) A Rothko? Take a same sized canvas by most any other well known artist and place it next to a Rothko. Hijack a tour bus, and have the passengers view the paintings side by side. Poll them after the viewing, and count how many times someone describes the Rothko as having been painted by a child (or some similar response.) I'd lay big money that that number would be far greater than zero. Is this valid? Well, it would be unlikely for a great number of the bus passengers to be art experts. It could, however, be said that the purpose of art is to make an impression upon the viewer/observer... I would say that Guernica MAKES one heck of an impression on me. Many paintings that could objectively be described as blobs, splashes, streaks, and drips (some colorful, some not) have made strong impressions on me. The only impression most Rothko works leave me with is that he probably could have cranked those out pretty quickly if they had Wagner Power Painters back in the 1950's and 1960's.
Put your money where your mouth is then. Firstly, buy a large canvas, quality brushes and oils. Do your research with regard to how Rothko prepared his surfaces etc, and attempt to make one yourself. I can assure you its incredibly easy to make a bad attempt at a Rothko and immensely difficult to make a good one, let alone a great one. 'Meh'...'made by a child' etc, etc. Try and make a good one and you may just find an appreciation/respect/understanding for Rothko's work that you obviously lack. There are a wealth of books available regarding the abstract expressionists that will give you a further context in which to consider the impact of his work. Perhaps you should do the legwork and not your fellow posters trying to convince you to appreciate something you obviously hold in contempt. Feel free to post images of your attempt.
ginge82: The only thing your exercise would show me is that getting the proper results is likely much harder than it appears. Such a conclusion would not surprise me, however, even if I could replicate a piece to a good level of visual satisfaction, I would still have a piece that LOOKED to me like a child did it. My lack of appreciation/respect/understanding of Rothko's should be obvious, because I rather explicitly stated such. Why should I spend hours delving into books on this matter (or any other that I have a bit of curiousity over), when I could ask the opinions of a wide range of people who may have something to share about it via a discussion website such as this one?
If you bothered to do the research and reading you could form your own informed opinion rather than merely ask for the opinions of others. That's the difference but I have a feeling you don't actually want to be convinced of anything nor are you open to change your strong negative opinion of his work. So I ask you why bother with this thread? What is the ACTUAL motivation? Again, if you think its a pointless exercise to attempt your own canvas, instead of repeating the 'child could do it' slight, why don't you get a child to attempt one? It will be a brutal reality check for you, I can assure you.
The actual motivation is that I was floored when a FAKE painting can sell for $8 million. No, it may not be as easy as me flailing away with a Wagner Power Painter, but apparently it is easy enough to find someone capable of producing something that is good enough to fool not only uneducated rubes like myself, but experts, museum curators, etc for a goodly long time before being caught. When I saw the painting in question (photos thereof), pieced that name together with works by Rothko I'd seen in person, I just had to shake my head & wonder why someone would pay that kind of money even for the REAL thing. Since people DO pay that kind of price, there must be a reason. Anybody want to give a REAL answer? Even if it is: "I just like the colors." That would be a legitimate answer & I would respect it as a personal opinion of the works in question.
