If you like Mark Rothko’s paintings as much as I do, you’ll be happy to know that the Tate Modern (which houses many of his works, including the Seagram murals which I’ve sampled above) has created a website where you can take a panoramic look at their Rothko exhibit.
[via the excellent Open Culture]
Skirl | Dan Dickinson 
Mark Rothko’s painting’s remind me of wallpaper.
I’d even go as far as to say he would make a good
house painter/Decorator. As for
“And no, you could not paint this yourself” how many
people would be bothered. Only people who are drug induced or
mental would bother to paint like this. it’s only 1 step away from
a road sign. beep beep. move over rothko you chancer……
Funny to think people would pay 15 million dollars for “wallpaper” eh? Maybe there’s a little more to it than interior decoration.
Tell you what “yiz are”, instead of criticizing the works of someone you obviously know nothing about, why don’t you go consult an English language book and learn about putting dashes properly in words (paintings, not painting’s, honey)
As for having Rothko as a house painter, I’m afraid he wouldn’t have painted yours, he wasn’t really a fan of people with limited minds
Good luck for the english book reading, try not to think too hard. And if you get bored, try painting your house.
Toodles!
This is gay!!!
Of course you could paint similar to this yourself, It is the utter simplicity that has made Rothko’s work what it is and the amount that it sells for is obscene yet warranted as his body of work will never get any larger and will slowly become smaller over time.
Sadly the price that the work commands would of been even more of an insult to the man as people who buy are collecting for the sake of it and will probably never understand the man or work.
In fact he may have taken on the housepainting job but im sure it would of been a little more abstract than yiz would of liked.
If you’re not at all proficient in visual language of form and texture, then Rothko’s works might not open up as well as they could. Nevertheless it’s blatant ignorance to argue these are mere decoration. That says much more about the commenter than the works in question, or even the artist behind them.
Bloody beautiful, is the exhibition at the modern perminant? I’m guessing it’s in one of the galleries you have to pay for?
There is absolutely no point in commenting on this, or any Rothko painting unless you’ve seen it in real life. I thought it was all some “emperor’s new clothes” type bullshit until I saw the real thing. There is just no way to get a sense of the scale or the absolute mastery of tone, texture and light-play just by looking at a gash little photo of it on the internet… yiz, you are a dickhead. Go take a look before spouting your ill-informed shit next time.